Posted on 08/27/2002 3:22:58 PM PDT by Shermy
New Orleans Police arrested and charged a man for the shooting death of a teenager who was allegedly trying to steal his car.
Sean Minor, 29, was charged with manslaughter in the shooting, because officers say he wasnt in danger at the time of the incident.
Police say that Minor shot the alleged burglar from his balcony while observing the victim and another man trying to break in to his car.
In the New Orleans East neighborhood where the incident occurred, some residents say what Minor did was justified.
"I feel he was justified, said one unidentified resident. Because that was someone elses property and he was only protecting what was his.
Meanwhile, at the coroners office, the victims family said they were pleased that Minor had been arrested.
He didn't have no right to kill him, said Wanda Munoz, the victims mother. If he was doing what they said he was doing, he should have just called the police and reported it. Why kill him."
But local defense attorneys said that even if Minor were taken to trial in the shooting, it would be hard to get a jury to convict.
The problem comes in cause many citizens will tell you that you have a right to protect your property and if they get to a jury they'll say they would do the same thing," said Robert Jenkins, a local defense attorney.
The NOPD will continue to gather evidence in the case and turn over the findings to the Orleans Parish District Attorneys Office. That office will make the ultimate determination on whether Minor is brought to trial.
Of course, every act is now subject to a lawsuit. We can take no action that will not result in a lawsuit. Get yourself an umbrella personal liability policy for just such a situation. There is no right answer here other than taking no action whatever, apparently. Something wrong with this IMO.
Dang Right!!! I live here in New Orleans. The week before New Years - my 94 Dodge (white, with running boards, and luggage rack) Caravan was stolen. 2 weeks later it was found wrecked and abandoned. Inside the van was one mess of BLUNTS, Cocaine, and New Year Party (complete with lip stick smuges) favors.
The replacement van has Talking Alarm System that went off after some joker broke the windows a couple of week after I bought it.
If I were on the JURY - I'd pin a metal on the Sean Minor!
Like the way ya think...
Of course, I'm not from Louisiana. Maybe I'm misreading the jury pool. But I don't think so.
LOL! I am laughing at the "even if" part.
Or let us take it a step further. What if a Policeman saw what this property owner saw, and called upon the thief to desist--and the thief continued. Would the Policeman be justified in shooting?
It is not a coincidence that there has been an increase in crimes against property, since law enforcement became so much more concerned over the safety of criminals. In most earlier times, it was understood that a thief assumed the risk of just this sort of intervention. Why have we changed in our attitudes--I don't mean all of us, but Society in general? This shooting sends a beneficial message to would be criminals. And that is the point, which most of us are focusing on.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site
And the same pool of juror/victims :)
Thus you have the absurd spectacle of 40 year old cops playing foot tag with eighteen year old punks.
But it used to be horn book law that you could use whatever force was necessary to prevent the commission of a felony.
As I suggested above, crimes against property are in their effect crimes against the owners of that property, as truly as are crimes against their persons. You are not going to end the rash of crimes born in contempt for private property until Society returns to a harsher standard against the thieves among us. It is not acceptable to let a punk steal the fruits of your labor. That is stealing a part of you that being mortal, with limited time on this earth, you may never be able to reclaim.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site
As a regular human being with just a brain, I am amazed that a lawyer would not know that it is a jury not I and not he who would ultimately decide.
My previous post aside, I actually agree with you. (couldn't resist the double-negative.)
Speaking from a personal standpoint, and as a CCW holder who is rarely without a gun, I would not shoot someone trying to steal my car.
I will only use a gun in a circumstance where my life, or the life of a loved one, is in immediate peril. This is my choice, however. The law in many areas does allow for the protection of property. And as the DA mentioned, jury's are sympathetic to the property owner, so he may well be acquitted for it.
As I said, I am rarely without a gun, but I don't ever want to have to use it. I would like to make it thru my life without having to kill anyone. I walk away from any altercation when I carry. I avoid the road-ragers. I will do anything I can to avoid a situation where I have to draw the weapon. This, to me, is the responsibility of any armed citizen.
Someone stealing my beat-up old jeep isn't going to affect me for the rest of my life. Killing them for trying to steal it most probably will.
ROTFLMAO!!! Thanks, in my defense, I'm a product of the New Orleans Public School System.
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.