A Miami woman killed a teen burglar as he fled her home, police say. Should she be charged?
Options
Comments
-
Jail timemryounggun wrote: »I'm legit curious: How would this have had to play out for you guys to feel like she SHOULD have to go to jail? For example:
-He comes out of her house and is walking down the driveway, she pulls up in her car. He freezes. She hops out and they exchange words and she shoots him? Jail time or naw?
-He comes out of her house, walks down the driveway and starts walking down the sidewalk. She is coming down the street and sees him leave her house and she pulls up next to him on the street 50 feet from her house and shoots him? Jail time or naw?
-He comes out of her house and is hopping over the fence. She pulls a Willie Manchester and shoots him in the back as he is hopping the fence to get away. Jail time or naw?
Serious questions. Anyone want to tackle these?
Jail time
Nah
In scenarios one and 2 she got the opportunity to hop out, get a description, try to detain him (if he beats her ass that's on her)
Sceranio 3. He still on the property and there a chance he could be getting a weapon or help. Shoot away -
Invading your privacy, sure.
Stop with the home invasion. It is completely different to what he did. Home invasion is the case where a man, his wife and baby were shot at a couple of months ago. No weapon found on his person.
Again no one was home when he was there. She is lucky there wasn't a group of kids with guns in that house when she entered. But then again, this is another hypothetical in this thread.
@ChiCity the name is Paprika, address me as such. -
The_Jackal wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »Since I've shared my opinion would appreciate it if you would oblige us with your opinion.
What exactly would have made him an imminent threat?
Would he have to need a weapon on his person? Would him voicing a threat of violence be enough? Would him taking a dominate stanch or even advancing(wither it just be a simple step) aggressively be a threat that justified her shooting him?
For me, him pointing some sort of weapon at her or advancing towards her or something in that vain would be 'imminent danger'.
So him threatening her or threatening to return wouldn't be enough?
Threatening her = I'd agree with that. She could reasonably believe that be is serious.
Threatening to return = no way. 'Imminent' means 'ready to happen or take place immediately'. Him saying he's coming back at a different date and time isn't 'imminent danger'. -
mryounggun wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »Since I've shared my opinion would appreciate it if you would oblige us with your opinion.
What exactly would have made him an imminent threat?
Would he have to need a weapon on his person? Would him voicing a threat of violence be enough? Would him taking a dominate stanch or even advancing(wither it just be a simple step) aggressively be a threat that justified her shooting him?
For me, him pointing some sort of weapon at her or advancing towards her or something in that vain would be 'imminent danger'.
So him threatening her or threatening to return wouldn't be enough?
Threatening her = I'd agree with that. She could reasonably believe that be is serious.
Threatening to return = no way. 'Imminent' means 'ready to happen or take place immediately'. Him saying he's coming back at a different date and time isn't 'imminent danger'.
OK let's assume that he ambiguously threatened to come back if she went to the police "I'll ? you up" or something else in that range. Isn't that in itself enough to make her fear for her life? -
Jail timemryounggun wrote: »I'm legit curious: How would this have had to play out for you guys to feel like she SHOULD have to go to jail? For example:
-He comes out of her house and is walking down the driveway, she pulls up in her car. He freezes. She hops out and they exchange words and she shoots him? Jail time or naw?
-He comes out of her house, walks down the driveway and starts walking down the sidewalk. She is coming down the street and sees him leave her house and she pulls up next to him on the street 50 feet from her house and shoots him? Jail time or naw?
-He comes out of her house and is hopping over the fence. She pulls a Willie Manchester and shoots him in the back as he is hopping the fence to get away. Jail time or naw?
Serious questions. Anyone want to tackle these?
Jail time
Nah
In scenarios one and 2 she got the opportunity to hop out, get a description, try to detain him (if he beats her ass that's on her)
Sceranio 3. He still on the property and there a chance he could be getting a weapon or help. Shoot away
Thanks but that doesn't make any sense. In scenario one he is also still on her property. The driveway is her property. So why no jail time? -
She can't verify he was actually in the homemryounggun wrote: »
Jail timemryounggun wrote: »I'm legit curious: How would this have had to play out for you guys to feel like she SHOULD have to go to jail? For example:
-He comes out of her house and is walking down the driveway, she pulls up in her car. He freezes. She hops out and they exchange words and she shoots him? Jail time or naw?
-He comes out of her house, walks down the driveway and starts walking down the sidewalk. She is coming down the street and sees him leave her house and she pulls up next to him on the street 50 feet from her house and shoots him? Jail time or naw?
-He comes out of her house and is hopping over the fence. She pulls a Willie Manchester and shoots him in the back as he is hopping the fence to get away. Jail time or naw?
Serious questions. Anyone want to tackle these?
Jail time
Nah
In scenarios one and 2 she got the opportunity to hop out, get a description, try to detain him (if he beats her ass that's on her)
Sceranio 3. He still on the property and there a chance he could be getting a weapon or help. Shoot away
Thanks but that doesn't make any sense. In scenario one he is also still on her property. The driveway is her property. So why no jail time?
Could easily say he heard the alarm and as a concerned citizen/neighbor he walked up to help. Not sure what 'exchange of words' was said but for sure she can't say he broke in UNLESS she witnessed him walking out the home. Doesn't seem to be the case.
Again she got a description for the cops, even detained him for a set time to argue. Nothing in that scenario sounds like she needed to whip the pistol out.
Hope that helped -
@Salt&PepperShaker, I won't do it.
-
The_Jackal wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »Since I've shared my opinion would appreciate it if you would oblige us with your opinion.
What exactly would have made him an imminent threat?
Would he have to need a weapon on his person? Would him voicing a threat of violence be enough? Would him taking a dominate stanch or even advancing(wither it just be a simple step) aggressively be a threat that justified her shooting him?
For me, him pointing some sort of weapon at her or advancing towards her or something in that vain would be 'imminent danger'.
So him threatening her or threatening to return wouldn't be enough?
Threatening her = I'd agree with that. She could reasonably believe that be is serious.
Threatening to return = no way. 'Imminent' means 'ready to happen or take place immediately'. Him saying he's coming back at a different date and time isn't 'imminent danger'.
OK let's assume that he ambiguously threatened to come back if she went to the police "I'll ? you up" or something else in that range. Isn't that in itself enough to make her fear for her life?
Fear for her life? Yes. But hat still isn't imminent danger and that SHOULD be (and is, according to the actual law) the standard, in my opinion. -
She can't verify he was actually in the homemryounggun wrote: »
Jail timemryounggun wrote: »I'm legit curious: How would this have had to play out for you guys to feel like she SHOULD have to go to jail? For example:
-He comes out of her house and is walking down the driveway, she pulls up in her car. He freezes. She hops out and they exchange words and she shoots him? Jail time or naw?
-He comes out of her house, walks down the driveway and starts walking down the sidewalk. She is coming down the street and sees him leave her house and she pulls up next to him on the street 50 feet from her house and shoots him? Jail time or naw?
-He comes out of her house and is hopping over the fence. She pulls a Willie Manchester and shoots him in the back as he is hopping the fence to get away. Jail time or naw?
Serious questions. Anyone want to tackle these?
Jail time
Nah
In scenarios one and 2 she got the opportunity to hop out, get a description, try to detain him (if he beats her ass that's on her)
Sceranio 3. He still on the property and there a chance he could be getting a weapon or help. Shoot away
Thanks but that doesn't make any sense. In scenario one he is also still on her property. The driveway is her property. So why no jail time?
Could easily say he heard the alarm and as a concerned citizen/neighbor he walked up to help. Not sure what 'exchange of words' was said but for sure she can't say he broke in UNLESS she witnessed him walking out the home. Doesn't seem to be the case.
Again she got a description for the cops, even detained him for a set time to argue. Nothing in that scenario sounds like she needed to whip the pistol out.
Hope that helped
Ah. Gotcha. -
mryounggun wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »Since I've shared my opinion would appreciate it if you would oblige us with your opinion.
What exactly would have made him an imminent threat?
Would he have to need a weapon on his person? Would him voicing a threat of violence be enough? Would him taking a dominate stanch or even advancing(wither it just be a simple step) aggressively be a threat that justified her shooting him?
For me, him pointing some sort of weapon at her or advancing towards her or something in that vain would be 'imminent danger'.
So him threatening her or threatening to return wouldn't be enough?
Threatening her = I'd agree with that. She could reasonably believe that be is serious.
Threatening to return = no way. 'Imminent' means 'ready to happen or take place immediately'. Him saying he's coming back at a different date and time isn't 'imminent danger'.
OK let's assume that he ambiguously threatened to come back if she went to the police "I'll ? you up" or something else in that range. Isn't that in itself enough to make her fear for her life?
Fear for her life? Yes. But hat still isn't imminent danger and that SHOULD be (and is, according to the actual law) the standard, in my opinion.
To get to my point it shows that he is ready and willing to use violence to intimate and cause harm to her. By insinuating such a threat and proclaiming his predispose towards violence he has put her life in imminent danger. Especially since we don't know if he will come back in a day, week,year or if he will be looking through her window to see if she will call the police and never actually leave her property but "comes back" into her house a mintue later -
I think all of yall are missing the most obvious point. And that's the fact that this ? ain't gon be in Rush Hour 3.
-
Melanin_Enriched wrote: »Melanin_Enriched wrote: »Yall ? weird. If you break into my house i dont care if you get away. If i see you at the corner store next day im shooting you. ? outta here condoning or supporting home invasion ? like its a joke or gta san andreas mini game.
Punishing people for killing others when their lives are not in danger is not the same as condoning breaking and entering
Thst part was just me. But if you catch a ? going thru a window you going to let him escape since your life isnt in immediate danger?
If I'm in the house and they're coming in that's one thing.
But if I'm in the house and they're running off the property, that's another can of worms. -
Melanin_Enriched wrote: »Melanin_Enriched wrote: »Yall ? weird. If you break into my house i dont care if you get away. If i see you at the corner store next day im shooting you. ? outta here condoning or supporting home invasion ? like its a joke or gta san andreas mini game.
Punishing people for killing others when their lives are not in danger is not the same as condoning breaking and entering
Thst part was just me. But if you catch a ? going thru a window you going to let him escape since your life isnt in immediate danger?
If I'm in the house and they're coming in that's one thing.
But if I'm in the house and they're running off the property, that's another can of worms.
So youll let them escape and potentially come back armed a second time? -
Melanin_Enriched wrote: »Melanin_Enriched wrote: »Melanin_Enriched wrote: »Yall ? weird. If you break into my house i dont care if you get away. If i see you at the corner store next day im shooting you. ? outta here condoning or supporting home invasion ? like its a joke or gta san andreas mini game.
Punishing people for killing others when their lives are not in danger is not the same as condoning breaking and entering
Thst part was just me. But if you catch a ? going thru a window you going to let him escape since your life isnt in immediate danger?
If I'm in the house and they're coming in that's one thing.
But if I'm in the house and they're running off the property, that's another can of worms.
So youll let them escape and potentially come back armed a second time?
In Florida? Nah, cause Americans are crazy and all of you own guns by the time you're 12
In Canada? Yeah, I'll take that bet. Self defense laws here are forgiving on instigators. -
Let's call it what it is: she shot the ? BECAUSE SHE COULD shoot the ? .
The law gave her permission to be a vigilante so she did. -
Let's call it what it is: she shot the ? BECAUSE SHE COULD shoot the ? .
The law says gave her permission to be a vigilante so she did.
People keep using this word and I don't think they know what it means.
Defending oneself/property is NOT being a vigilante -
The_Jackal wrote: »
She wasn't defending her property. He didn't have anything. Unless he was stealing the house or the lawn. Dude was empty handed. -
I would have shot him. That's the reason you have a gun.
-
The_Jackal wrote: »
She wasn't defending her property. He didn't have anything. Unless he was stealing the house or the lawn. Dude was empty handed.
It doesn't matter if he did or didn't he still illegal broke in and off that assumption it's completly justifiable for her to assume he took something.
That's doesn't even negate the fact that just by illegal entering her house he still was depriving her of the right to freely use her property (through actual house) -
The_Jackal wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »
She wasn't defending her property. He didn't have anything. Unless he was stealing the house or the lawn. Dude was empty handed.
It doesn't matter if he did or didn't he still illegal broke in and off that assumption it's completly justifiable for her to assume he took something.
That's doesn't even negate the fact that just by illegal entering her house he still was depriving her of the right to freely use her property (through actual house)
Because thats what the law says. Which is what I said. She shot him, my POV: so what? But we know she shot the ? BECAUSE she knew she could get away with it. -
The_Jackal wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »
She wasn't defending her property. He didn't have anything. Unless he was stealing the house or the lawn. Dude was empty handed.
It doesn't matter if he did or didn't he still illegal broke in and off that assumption it's completly justifiable for her to assume he took something.
That's doesn't even negate the fact that just by illegal entering her house he still was depriving her of the right to freely use her property (through actual house)
Because thats what the law says. Which is what I said. She shot him, my POV: so what? But we know she shot the ? BECAUSE she knew she could get away with it.
You THINAK she shoot him because of that instead of the completly logical reason that she could have been in fear of her life. After all you don't shoot a fleeing man in the chest -
The_Jackal wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »
She wasn't defending her property. He didn't have anything. Unless he was stealing the house or the lawn. Dude was empty handed.
It doesn't matter if he did or didn't he still illegal broke in and off that assumption it's completly justifiable for her to assume he took something.
That's doesn't even negate the fact that just by illegal entering her house he still was depriving her of the right to freely use her property (through actual house)
Because thats what the law says. Which is what I said. She shot him, my POV: so what? But we know she shot the ? BECAUSE she knew she could get away with it.
Let's be honest, we can't know that for sure. Only she can. We can only assume. -
The_Jackal wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »
She wasn't defending her property. He didn't have anything. Unless he was stealing the house or the lawn. Dude was empty handed.
It doesn't matter if he did or didn't he still illegal broke in and off that assumption it's completly justifiable for her to assume he took something.
That's doesn't even negate the fact that just by illegal entering her house he still was depriving her of the right to freely use her property (through actual house)
Because thats what the law says. Which is what I said. She shot him, my POV: so what? But we know she shot the ? BECAUSE she knew she could get away with it.
You THINAK she shoot him because of that instead of the completly logical reason that she could have been in fear of her life. After all you don't shoot a fleeing man in the chest
If you were in fear you wouldn't have ran into the danger. That's ? . She was unarmed when she got home. If it was so damn scary why go home?
Its a lame excuse. We know what it is but its a legal shot. -
mryounggun wrote: »Lock her ass up. If he was fleeing like the report says, then there was no imminent threat to her life.
? her.
If he hadn't broken into her house, he wouldn't have been shot.
Dude just picked the wrong house to break into.
-
How do you know she was unarmed when she got in the house?The_Jackal wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »
She wasn't defending her property. He didn't have anything. Unless he was stealing the house or the lawn. Dude was empty handed.
It doesn't matter if he did or didn't he still illegal broke in and off that assumption it's completly justifiable for her to assume he took something.
That's doesn't even negate the fact that just by illegal entering her house he still was depriving her of the right to freely use her property (through actual house)
Because thats what the law says. Which is what I said. She shot him, my POV: so what? But we know she shot the ? BECAUSE she knew she could get away with it.
You THINAK she shoot him because of that instead of the completly logical reason that she could have been in fear of her life. After all you don't shoot a fleeing man in the chest
If you were in fear you wouldn't have ran into the danger. That's ? . She was unarmed when she got home. If it was so damn scary why go home?
Its a lame excuse. We know what it is but its a legal shot.
