The NEXT Zimmerman: 'White Caucasian' shoots 14y/o black breaking in his home

[churchmouse]

Does one get a pass on criminal activity due to brain damage? I'm not a lawyer but I'm sure that'll be argued in court.

Would not think so with past behavior as a pattern.

 

[ModernGunner]

One wonders if it was 'better' or 'worse' for the law-abiding people of the neighborhood that this thug's criminal career wasn't ended by Landry. Anyone ever find out what happened with Landry? Is he still waiting to be prosecuted for the shooting WHILE this thug is BACK out on the streets getting arrested for burglary, again? This is why juveniles should NOT have their criminal records sealed when they reach their majority age.

IC 35-41-3-2(d) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against any other person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.

Noted: that does NOT say one 'must be in fear of death or grave bodily injury' in that citation.

If you choose to 'hole up' in some safe room, that's your call. If you choose to investigate, that's your call.

From earlier in the thread, I agree with CathyInBlue on the decision to one-handed frisk for (other) weapons, in the scenario as CIB described. That IS acting in self-defense. Others may choose to sit and wait. Again, their call.

Let's remember: Shooting is a proactive, offensive act of violence, even when done to defend oneself, family, others in their purview, or property.

 

[Jack Burton]

the grand jury has now refused TWICE to put Landry up for prosecution. The DA is weighing his options at this time.

 

[ModernGunner]

the grand jury has now refused TWICE to put Landry up for prosecution. The DA is weighing his options at this time.

Thanks, Jack. Hadn't heard anything further.

All that really tells me is the DA should be removed from office for violation of the 'stupidity' clause.

 

[IndyDave1776]

If nothing else, one would hope that the grand jury would end this along with instructing the DA to get his head out from up his ass, especially after the little hoodlum has been rolled up for burglary again. That should effectively dispel the myth that his worst offense in life had been singing too loudly in church.

 

[churchmouse]

Thanks, Jack. Hadn't heard anything further.

All that really tells me is the DA should be removed from office for violation of the 'stupidity' clause.

We have exactly the same deal here in Marion County....total waste of Oxygen up in the Prosecutors office.

 

[Hohn]

That is why he climbed a locked security gate at 2am in the morning, because he is a good child.

Had to retrieve his AP Calculus text, don't you know!

 

[actaeon277]

Maybe OSHA should get involved. Unsafe work environment and all that.

 

[Jack Burton]

Thanks, Jack. Hadn't heard anything further.

All that really tells me is the DA should be removed from office for violation of the 'stupidity' clause.

Here is the link for it

Law of Self Defense | Merritt Landry | Grand Jury

 

[Hohn]

They'll say that the kids don't have anything else to do. They'll blame it on poverty. Anything but themselves which is basically the frame of mind and attitude that is being perpetuated from parent to child.

You know, one COULD interject that a "better thing to do at 2AM is sleep. But that implies that you actually have to be out of bed at a certain time, say for a job or something....hypothetically speaking.

 

[ryknoll3]

If nothing else, one would hope that the grand jury would end this along with instructing the DA to get his head out from up his ass, especially after the little hoodlum has been rolled up for burglary again. That should effectively dispel the myth that his worst offense in life had been singing too loudly in church.

I agree, but legally this can't be used when considering charges against the homeowner, right? He had no knowledge (as far as we know) about this kid's pastimes. It was the same in the Minnesota case where the homeowner laid in wait for the burglars. The judge didn't let the jury hear of the kids' records who broke into the house because though the homeowner knew there were robberies in the area, including his own home, and anticipated there would be another (which came to pass), he had no knowledge of THOSE kids' past, so that couldn't have informed his decision to take the action he did, and therefore could not be considered by the jury.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I agree, but legally this can't be used when considering charges against the homeowner, right? He had no knowledge (as far as we know) about this kid's pastimes. It was the same in the Minnesota case where the homeowner laid in wait for the burglars. The judge didn't let the jury hear of the kids' records who broke into the house because though the homeowner knew there were robberies in the area, including his own home, and anticipated there would be another (which came to pass), he had no knowledge of THOSE kids' past, so that couldn't have informed his decision to take the action he did, and therefore could not be considered by the jury.

I could see it being disallowed as a preemptive defense, but would imagine it would be allowed if the prosecution tried the 'he murdered these poor innocent little saints who never did anything wrong in their lives and were little pillars of the community who accidentally turned on sidewalk too soon' nonsense. Not a lawyer, but I recall having seen examples (of which I don're remember the particulars any more) that in cases where one side could not introduce evidence and the other can, if the side which can opens the can of worms, all the worms are fair game.

Perhaps more important is the fact that a grand jury will not be sequestered and if anyone on it has watched the news or read the paper, while they may not hear the evidence in court, well, what has been seen cannot be unseen.

 

[ryknoll3]

I could see it being disallowed as a preemptive defense, but would imagine it would be allowed if the prosecution tried the 'he murdered these poor innocent little saints who never did anything wrong in their lives and were little pillars of the community who accidentally turned on sidewalk too soon' nonsense. Not a lawyer, but I recall having seen examples (of which I don're remember the particulars any more) that in cases where one side could not introduce evidence and the other can, if the side which can opens the can of worms, all the worms are fair game.

Perhaps more important is the fact that a grand jury will not be sequestered and if anyone on it has watched the news or read the paper, while they may not hear the evidence in court, well, what has been seen cannot be unseen.

You are correct that the other side can bring these issues up as rebuttal testimony were the prosecution to play the "poor little angel" card. I'm sure the prosecution considers this before going down that road though, so if they were smart, they would just leave the "poor little angel" angle to the media.

 

[Jack Burton]

The "poor little angel" has now been busted for even more crimes than a few days ago, serious ones here...

Marshall Coulter | Merritt Landry | Self-Defense

 

[churchmouse]

The "poor little angel" has now been busted for even more crimes than a few days ago, serious ones here...

Marshall Coulter | Merritt Landry | Self-Defense

Did I actually see that correctly...those idiots were protesting for this little monster.....

 

[Motorhead302]

i can't believe this idiot went right out and burglarized someone again, after being shot in the freaking head. what a winner. i hope those protesters are all hanging their heads in shame over this, but i'm not holding my breath about it.

 

[churchmouse]

i can't believe this idiot went right out and burglarized someone again, after being shot in the freaking head. what a winner. i hope those protesters are all hanging their heads in shame over this, but i'm not holding my breath about it.

They are most likely on to the next issue on their worthless and meandering agenda.

 

[Motorhead302]

They are most likely on to the next issue on their worthless and meandering agenda.

true, following one's bleeding heart often leads one astray. lol

 

[churchmouse]

true, following one's bleeding heart often leads one astray. lol

I truly believe if you are protesting someone/thing such as this then one of the protesters should take this idiot on and straighten him out. If you are not willing to do this then let it go and pick an issue worth protesting for.

 

[Motorhead302]

I truly believe if you are protesting someone/thing such as this then one of the protesters should take this idiot on and straighten him out. If you are not willing to do this then let it go and pick an issue worth protesting for.

a good point, but i think the type that like to protest aren't really "hands on". more of the online petition, carbon credit type.