Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: JRandomFreeper
From what I have read, they were fleeing his home and he winged her, halting her flight. And then shot her as she pled for her life while she was immobilized.

I would have no problem with a just and rational justice system handling this perp severely. But this was not personal self-defense unless she still had a weapon and posed a threat. It is questionable self-defense in a lot of states to shoot at someone fleeing your property after an offense. I am not objecting to that aspect of this case. But killing someone on the ground who poses no risk to you because you have wounded them? That is not in the realm of the self-defense rights I fight for.

21 posted on 07/25/2014 6:02:52 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: dirtboy

He is 80 years old and just had just been beaten to the point that his bones were broken. He didn’t know if she had a weapon. Once a person gets in a fight or flight situation and decides to fight they can’t turn it off like flipping a light switch.

If this goes to trial and I was on the jury I can assure you there would be at least 1 not guilty.

Just my opinion.


25 posted on 07/25/2014 6:31:52 PM PDT by hirn_man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: dirtboy

>> That is not in the realm of the self-defense rights I fight for.

Except an intrusion can alter the homeowner’s state of mind.

Be careful about how you apply compassion.


64 posted on 07/26/2014 5:59:57 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson