Old white man shoots pregnant black woman intruder (he's going to jail)

#26
#26
The guy committed murder. Plain and simple. It's no longer self defense when you pursue someone and shoot them while they are fleeing. I understand the rage associated with someone intruding into your home and stealing your hard-earned property, but when they run, it's time to call the police, not pursue vigilante justice.
 
Last edited:
#29
#29
E-Tizzle said:
It's a little deeper than him being mad.

He was initially in significant danger:



These were not first-time offenders


He had been previously burgled three times - possibly by the same couple


The more detailed description/timeline


It appears as though he was still in imminent danger when he began opening fire. He continued firing as they fled his house, through the garage and into the alley. The woman was hit, but it is unclear WHEN she was hit (could have been prior to exiting the house), but that she collapsed and died in the alley.

Definitely more to it than "him being mad".
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't burglars continue to make multiple attempts if all they have to do is run outside the house to flee from any risk? Seems reasonable to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#30
#30
lawgator1 said:
I got the impression she was fatally shot outside the house. Twice. In the back.

How is he still threatened if they are running away from him and are outside the house and he's chasing after them firing?
Click to expand...

I can fully understand the mans rage, being attacked in his own home and all. If he shot her while she was INSIDE his house, in the back or not, I wouldn't vote to convict or even charge if a prosecutor. If he shot her OUTSIDE the house he should stand trial for manslaughter.

This is a situation where the brain has to override the rage.
 
#31
#31
E-Tizzle said:
It's a little deeper than him being mad.

He was initially in significant danger:



These were not first-time offenders


He had been previously burgled three times - possibly by the same couple


The more detailed description/timeline


It appears as though he was still in imminent danger when he began opening fire. He continued firing as they fled his house, through the garage and into the alley. The woman was hit, but it is unclear WHEN she was hit (could have been prior to exiting the house), but that she collapsed and died in the alley.

Definitely more to it than "him being mad".
Click to expand...

I think he will be able to argue that he was in fear for his life and was worried they would come back to kill him. The fact that they broke his collarbone will work in his favor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#32
#32
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Why wouldn't burglars continue to make multiple attempts if all they have to do is run outside the house to flee from any risk? Seems reasonable to me.
Click to expand...


Its not his right or duty to generally prevent possible future crime. If that were the standard, Lord have mercy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#33
#33
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Interesting. I would be opposite... head would say okay, but heart would say no.



I guess if criminals know this that might explain the increase in the crime rate. No worries... if they catch you in the act just start running.



Perfect! :)
Click to expand...

:crazy: Shoot first...ask questions later is the motto nowdays.
 
#34
#34
lawgator1 said:
Its not his right or duty to generally prevent possible future crime. If that were the standard, Lord have mercy.
Click to expand...

But it was the standard less than a century ago, and if the courts deemed someone used bad judgement... then they were held accountable.

I'm just not sure if we're better off, from a societal perspective, with today's standard or not?
 
#35
#35
davethevol said:
I think he will be able to argue that he was in fear for his life and was worried they would come back to kill him. The fact that they broke his collarbone will work in his favor.
Click to expand...

There's going to have to be a lot more exculpatory evidence come forth than what I've read to this point to believe that would work. The assumption that a fleeing person MIGHT come back as a justification for lethal force in the context of this case is going to be a tough sell in a courtroom.
 
#36
#36
Regarding crime rates, this is what we generally see as being reported...

images


... but this puts it a little more in perspective.

ViolentCrimerate.jpg


image6.gif


Everything else being equal, if there is seemingly less risk for committing crimes (e.g. burglary) then the odds are more crimes will be committed.
 
#37
#37
I think most of us would agree, that if that same scenario happened to any of us that we would've done the same thing.

It's not like the old man killed this woman execution style, point blank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#38
#38
AirVol said:
I think most of us would agree, that if that same scenario happened to any of us that we would've done the same thing.

It's not like the old man killed this woman execution style, point blank.
Click to expand...

If shown to be in the residence it's an entirely different question. If it's demonstrated these people were outside and fleeing not only do I think the majority of people wouldn't have done this but I think the old fellow is in real trouble.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#39
#39
hndog609 said:
If shown to be in the residence it's an entirely different question. If it's demonstrated these people were outside and fleeing not only do I think the majority of people wouldn't have done this but I think the old fellow is in real trouble.
Click to expand...

I agree, but after being assaulted like he was, his mentality was he was going to have the last word and started shooting.

Say a bank robber comes in a bank, assaults someone and the robber gets shot dead just outside the bank. Is the shooter a hero or a murderer?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#40
#40
AirVol said:
I think most of us would agree, that if that same scenario happened to any of us that we would've done the same thing.

It's not like the old man killed this woman execution style, point blank.
Click to expand...

You thought wrong. The overwhelming majority of posters ITT have said the exact opposite.

As I said, a very similar scenario happened to me... I was just happy that all I lost that night were material possessions.

It's very, very easy to speak out of term on this issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#41
#41
AirVol said:
I agree, but after being assaulted like he was, his mentality was he was going to have the last word and started shooting.

Say a bank robber comes in a bank, assaults someone and the robber gets shot dead just outside the bank. Is the shooter a hero or a murderer?
Click to expand...

Not a good comparison. Stealing from a state/federal institution is not on the same personal level as stealing from someone's home/the one place they feel safe and comfortable.
 
#42
#42
E-Tizzle said:
It's a little deeper than him being mad.

He was initially in significant danger:



These were not first-time offenders


He had been previously burgled three times - possibly by the same couple


The more detailed description/timeline


It appears as though he was still in imminent danger when he began opening fire. He continued firing as they fled his house, through the garage and into the alley. The woman was hit, but it is unclear WHEN she was hit (could have been prior to exiting the house), but that she collapsed and died in the alley.

Definitely more to it than "him being mad".
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is failing to see why he did it... it's still wrong and he deserves punishment for being irresponsible with both his firearm and human life.
 
#44
#44
It takes a special kind of vindictive mentality to shoot someone in the back in a non war scenario.
 
#45
#45
AirVol said:
I agree, but after being assaulted like he was, his mentality was he was going to have the last word and started shooting.

Say a bank robber comes in a bank, assaults someone and the robber gets shot dead just outside the bank. Is the shooter a hero or a murderer?
Click to expand...

If I were his counsel I'd try coming up with something that involved being 80yrs old and still in a whirlwind of just having been attacked and reacting to *insert worse possible description of attack here* and hope for the best. The fact remains that LEGALLY "he was going to have the last word" isn't a particularly compelling defense.

To your second part it depends on the context of the question. Most people really won't be mourning the bad guy getting shot. LEGALLY however your scenario has some serious issues. You didn't expressly say the bad guy was armed but that would certainly help. (from a defendant's POV)
 
#46
#46
DinkinFlicka said:
You thought wrong. The overwhelming majority of posters ITT have said the exact opposite.

As I said, a very similar scenario happened to me... I was just happy that all I lost that night were material possessions.

It's very, very easy to speak out of term on this issue.
Click to expand...

Airvol is no more "speaking out of term on this issue" than you are. iirc... you posted that you had been robbed, and then the robber(s) left. You did not indicate that you had been beaten, that your collar bone had been broken, and that you had been robbed on multiple occasions.

That scenario, I believe, does most likely change how some people would respond. I'm not suggesting the guy was correct in what he did, but I can certainly understand why he may have done it.

If you take the home out of the equation, and he had been robbed and beaten in the alley... does the situation change?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#48
#48
DinkinFlicka said:
You thought wrong. The overwhelming majority of posters ITT have said the exact opposite.

As I said, a very similar scenario happened to me... I was just happy that all I lost that night were material possessions.

It's very, very easy to speak out of term on this issue.
Click to expand...

Dink, I vaguely remember your situation- but would you have shot at the intruder given the chance? Did he harm you in any way?
 
#49
#49
AirVol said:
I think most of us would agree, that if that same scenario happened to any of us that we would've done the same thing.

It's not like the old man killed this woman execution style, point blank.
Click to expand...


No, I'd have called 911 to get them there ASAP in case they came back. I wouldn't go chasing after them.

Who, in genuine fear as opposed to being pissed off, chases after the people he is afraid of?

Come on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#50
#50
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Airvol is no more "speaking out of term on this issue" than you are. iirc... you posted that you had been robbed, and then the robber(s) left. You did not indicate that you had been beaten, that your collar bone had been broken, and that you had been robbed on multiple occasions.

That scenario, I believe, does most likely change how some people would respond. I'm not suggesting the guy was correct in what he did, but I can certainly understand why he may have done it.

If you take the home out of the equation, and he had been robbed and beaten in the alley... does the situation change?
Click to expand...

1. I was beaten, and my dog's life was threatened at gunpoint before mine. They took my wallet out, and asked if the address on it was my parents' address and used that as leverage. Needless to say, these guys were making my blood boil.

2. I stated earlier that I understand why he may have done it. Still wasn't right.

3. No, it does not. Use of a firearm comes down to two things: life is in danger, or shots have been fired from the other party. If someone is in your home, then you can assume the former.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top