Posted on 02/23/2008 1:32:46 PM PST by woofie
Elton John Richard II made split-second decisions— good ones— as a member of an elite Marine reconnaissance unit clearing towns ahead of the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
But District Judge Albert "Pat" Murdoch ordered Richard to spend two years in a New Mexico prison Friday for a decision that propelled him into a fatal pursuit of a man he thought was breaking into his home in 2004.
Richard, then working a Department of Energy courier with a Q clearance, fatally shot Daniel Romero, 34, after chasing him from his yard to Paseo del Norte.
Murdoch's pronouncement shocked Richard's family, whose attorneys had pressed for probation and a deferred sentence for their client with an otherwise spotless record.
Murdoch ordered Richard taken into custody immediately as the loud, heaving sobs of his mother swelled a few rows behind him.
Richard, 30, stood up and had time to put on his glasses before a sheriff's deputy approached with handcuffs.
Before the plea, Richard's attorney, Billy Blackburn, reminded Murdoch that Richard had pleaded no contest to voluntary manslaughter on the day jury selection was to begin last October in hopes of being able to spend time with his young son, now 4 years old.
And Richard himself said he had used tact, bearing and discipline after hearing a noise, going to investigate and finding a man in his yard.
"This individual (Romero) had both his hands on my revolver and was trying to pry it from my hands," he told the judge.
Wrenching decision
Murdoch, presiding judge in the criminal division, said he had struggled with the decision probably more than any other in his 22 years on the bench.
He told emotional family members ... that there was no "right" decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at abqjournal.com ...
This case has not gone over well here... If I understand it correctly ,had Elton John Richard II shot Romero when he caught him in his garage he would not have faced charges.
But when he tried to detain him and fought with him
it opened Richard up to a charge of murder
The right decision was to dismiss the case and praise Richard for defending himself and his property. Murdoch doesn't belong on the bench.
So the moral of the story is... if the home invader gets out of the house, there is absolutely nothing you can do to bring him to justice... because he is sure gonna run away and most likely burgle/murder someone else some other day...
Recall this idiot.
Should have shot the crimigrant on his property and gotten a shovel.
What in he## kind of law is that? People have got to get active, fight these extremist lawmakers and take them out at the voting booth. And the judge had a choice apparently. Wrestled with his decision? And came up with that?
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson’s public message form:
http://www.governor.state.nm.us/emailchoice.php?mm=6
Please be polite.
He told emotional family members ... that there was no “right” decision.
But he made sure that he made the “wrong” one...
You are correct. The home invader presents no threat to the life to the owner if he is out of the residence. A better moral would be to drag the POS back in side after the clip is emptied into him.
The unannounced presence of a stranger within the "curtailage" of your home is rightfully treated as extreme threat particularly when the number of cases of ambush invasion from the garage or a ceiling crawlspace or closet are examined.
Richard suffers from his bad decision to hire a bad lawyer.
The rest of us suffer as well because of the precedent now set.
An example of what happens when an ambush invasion from the garage is successful in the words of a California Grandmother who learned the hard way:
*****************************************
May you stand before God and man as my two precious grandchildren's killer if you pass any more gun legislation that will make me a felon should I own a handgun or any other gun for that matter.
Sincerely,
Mary Carpenter
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=7CCB40F421ED4819
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/deaths_in_merced.htm
http://www.grnc.org/mary_carpenter_letter.htm
Best regards,
Case Dismissed would have been a good start.
Wonder what Daniel Romero’s status was? Did he have a record?
If you're forced to kill the son of a bitch outside then you need to drag the corpse back in the house before the authorities arrive.
Asshat.
One person’s life was ruined by a criminal act that led to his death, and he possibly ruined his own family’s, as well.
Now, you’ve ruined another man’s life, and possibly his family’s, too.
No “right” decision”? A man that can’t decipher right from wrong shouldn’t be on the bench. Your butt sucks buttermilk, judge.
Wait, what was all this about BRITAIN going to hell in a handbasket for jailing Tony Martin for exactly the same reasons?
Not too sure of the laws in that state, but usualy, once the assailiant breaks off the attack and flees, any pursuit, especially with a weapon, opens the pursuer (once the “victim”) up to being the “attacker”, and the now fleeing oringinal attacker becomes the victim, with entitlement to self defense.
Who was protecting the family inside????
Whether you like it or not, that may be the law-it is in MO; the choice to prosecute or not though, rests with teh DA/PA, liberal ones may want to “crucify” a good guy just to make points with the other side.
Being aware of the laws involved in self defense situations is more than having a CCW or whatever. You must be familiar with countervailing force, fleeing suspects etc.
The best choice is if presented with a lethal force situation, use it, use it until the “suspect” can no longer press an attack.
From what I see of this case, once the bad guy grabbed the revolver, there was only one choice, shoot the perp to stop him. Even cops know that weapon retention and the ability to keep possession as well as control, is never to be sacrificed-for the civilina, stand-off distance is the best offense-no need to be stronger than the perp, just need about 2 seconds of distance-if a turd is stupid enough to advance in the face of a firearm, he needs to be stopped, now!
Even though it may sound wuss-like-it is best to stay inside and armed, even if state law allows one to defend property-too many negatives involved over saving a “thing”, or capturing the bad guy for the law. My choice is to have a low-cost camera system that cover the main approaches to my home-and a digital recorder that snaps pics every 4 seconds, then either I can archive or reuse the CD, only about $200, cheaper than a one hour session with a good lawyer.
God Bless this young Marine.
CCW and defensive handgun, NRA Pistol Instructor
However, he was put there by the good people of New Mexico in their infinite wisdom.
Thank you, and thank you for all your service. Couldn’t read the details in that Albq paper—I have heard cops say this, if you shoot him outside, then drag him inside! But what if you’re 80 years old, say, alone, or young woman and very pregnant, neighbors who are afraid to help, or no neighbors—what if you’re disabled, can’t drag the creep anywhere? Then you’re screwed. Go to war & fight for your country, lucky to come home alive but then get the shaft by a supremem jerk of a judge for defending your family. Who said it now, “the law is an ass”?
"The home invader presents no threat to the life to the owner if he is out of the residence. A better moral would be to drag the POS back in side after the clip is emptied into him."
Then be sure to hose your lawn off
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.