Skip to comments.Trial Ordered For Detroit-area Man Charged In Porch Shooting
Posted on 12/19/2013 12:18:55 PM PST by SatinDoll
(Reuters) - A white suburban Detroit homeowner [Theodore Wafer, 54] should stand trial on charges of second-degree murder in the shooting death of a young black woman [Renisha McBride, 19] who knocked on his door in the middle of the night in November, a Michigan judge said...
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
If this man is convicted of 2nd Degree Murder, expect more white flight from the area around Detroit.
I swear, journalists are getinng dumber all the time.
It’s likely the woman wasn’t selling Girl Scout cookies.
Where’s the rest of the story? What little there is makes it sound like she rang his doorbell, so he shot her...end of story. I’ll bet anything that the context that NBC so conveniently left out would paint a somewhat different picture.
They immediately made sure we knew the races involved.
When it’s the other way around, they deliberately and intentionally suppress the races.
So, when they don’t mention the races, we know what happened.
I feel sorry for Renisha McBride’s family, but Wafer had no idea what he whether this was an ambush, or not.
Didn’t I read that he admitted to accidentally pulling the trigger?
He may or may not face jail time. But he did step in it. Big time.
I know this is a serious story, but the first thing I thought of was the bad grammar, too-why would anyone be charged for shooting a porch?
why would he shoot a Porsche—— daggumit!
I was trying to figure out why someone would shoot a porch.
Did he shoot her through the door?
If I were his attorney I would try to talk him out of going to trial.
You sound a little insane.
You can’t gun down someone knocking on your door and expect to just brush it off.
Can he the defendant change this decision once the judge has spoken? Hope so. I would have shot her too, an unknown person, alone, maybe, loudly banging on doors at X’’oClock in the dark morning? You don’t do things like that and not expect consequences. Most men know about the old trick of send an attractive young lady to a man’s door to ask for directions, let’s say. As soon as the door is cracked for her, two men rush into the house, hit the homeowner with a gun butt, then take over the environment. He needs to switch laywers if his attorney has such a small skill set as to let this happen to his client. If his lawyer is court appointed, this may be working against him also. From the politically correct perspective, the pro bono lawyer does not lose much by losing this case.
No kidding...wait until you see the gangbangers on the jury! I would have advised him to get out of dodge!
She had apparently hit some cars on the street a couple hours prior. Her BAC was still quite high when this occurred.
We don’t know what was happening and the guy says he had his gun but did not intend to shoot her. perhaps she startled him
Well then you would probably also be tried for 2nd degree murder. It certainly can't be considered 'justified self-defense'. You do not have a right to shoot irritating people, even when they are knocking on your door.
There were many alternatives available to him. He could have ignored her altogether, and stayed behind the locked door. He could have done that and called 911. He could have told her to go away and stayed behind the locked door.
I sound insane!?
He opens the door and two men rush in, shoot him and his wife dead then ransack the house. Meanwhile the young woman is standing lookout in front.
Sound crazy? Don’t laugh too hard. It is an old trick using a young woman-in-distress as bait, one of the oldest tricks thieves possess.
The proper response to a knock on the door in the middle of the night is to call 911 and have them on the line as you talk to the “knocker” through a window.
Be careful who you call crazy, Ansel.
As a side note, there were witnesses to this girl's travel thru the neighborhoods which makes me wonder why none of them called the cops on her......
I have a friend who was convicted of manslaughter years ago. He got in a drunken fight with his best friend and the friend went down and hit his head.
A jury would have eaten him alive. He admitted that he was guilty of starting the fight and he was the one who caused the other guy to go down.
You can’t gun down a person for knocking on your door even if she is drunk and wrecked her car.
Why do some freepers need to defend every loser whack case, as long as he uses a gun?
Didnt say you could. Some of the facts do raise the possibility that she wasnt acting rationally.
He said it was an accident. that he shot her by accident.
Not sure how that happens but its plausible IMO.
Now you are sounding crazier than ever.
A part of you seems to recognize that, as you describe an alternative to gunning down a woman knocking on your front door. ""The proper response to a knock on the door in the middle of the night is to call 911 and have them on the line as you talk to the knocker through a window."".
I don’t see the need to be defending a panicky idiot gun owner who accidently kills someone knocking at his front door.
When you shoot an unarmed woman knocking on your front door, you are obviously doing something wrong.
Well you are assuming all she was doing was knocking. If someone starts banging on my door and acting irrationally at 3:30am I would be on edge as well.
Your use of “idiot gun owner” is quite interesting. So are you against all gun owners?
I’m an old Texan and a grew up around normal people and guns, I am assuming that some panicky modern idiot killed an unarmed woman on his porch.
You seem to be throwing everything you can out to create a reason for that.
yet you never answered the question
As long as it was his own porch I see nothing wrong with him shooting it...
As long as it was his own porch I see nothing wrong with him shooting it...
If you about gun owners, it is as a gun owner and being around gun owners all my life that I can’t figure out why you want to defend panicky little goof balls who can’t handle themselves and get people killed.
I can see why you revealed that you felt sympathy with his fear and panic, and want to defend his incompetence, or worse.
Personally, this doesn’t sound like the kind of man who wins respect and sympathy in my world of gun owners.
now I see, you are just a confused person. I never expressed sympathy for him.
I just expressed there may be more to the story rather then jumping to conclusions and calling people all kinds of names.
‘... loudly banging on doors at XoClock in the dark morning? You dont do things like that and not expect consequences.....
UMMM PERZAKLY L/M....AND WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN WRONG WITH THIS LADY JUST .... STANDING IN THE YARD WAY WAY WAY BACK FROM THE DOOR THEN ... SCREAMING ‘HELP ME PLEASE I’M IN TROUBLE, PLEASE’ WITH HER HANDS UP PERHAPS...
NOBODY SHOOTS ANYBODY UNDER THAT CIRCUMSTANCE.......
Your determined and sustained and varying, defense of the guy, shows your sympathy with him, as does your expression of describing how you yourself would be “on edge” as a level of support for him killing a woman.
The guy is an embarrassment to men and gun owners, and he killed an unarmed woman on his front porch.
Not everything, or every loser, needs defending, just because he uses a gun.
You are wrong to keep defending this incompetent boobs misuse of a gun.
So far the evidence seems to support me, that is why it is going to trial, when an unarmed woman is gunned down on a man’s front porch, then it really looks bad for that man.
My understanding of this case...which surely could be incomplete....suggests that this was a genuine tragedy that *might* warrant a charge of negligent something-or-other brought against the shooter but,perhaps,not murder.
Situation came up last year around here. The person who had "gotten lost" took off into nearby woods. Police seemed to like the challenge just fine.
As far as Liberas are concerned, all you need to know about what happened in this story is there. She was Black and he was White, end of story. White shot black = racist murder.
“There were many alternatives available to him. He could have ignored her altogether, and stayed behind the locked door. He could have done that and called 911. He could have told her to go away and stayed behind the locked door.”
Actually, the shooter is also black. 99% probability of being an Obama voter.
Sorry, I am clearly confused, The article sad, Quoting “ (Reuters) - A white suburban Detroit homeowner should stand trial )
Also too, I don’t see the details discussed by others in this thread, such as the auto accident and etc.
I may have link issues with the article, what I see is very abbreviated.
Thanks for the clarification.