A Miami woman killed a teen burglar as he fled her home, police say. Should she be charged?
Options
Comments
-
The audacity of someone breaking into your property and taking your belongings can enrage the calmest person.
While I think I wouldn't shoot someone in the back and I can understand the argument against it.....
What if you got babies in the house?
What if its just another break in , in a series of break ins and he's getting bolder.
I don't condone.... But I understand.
And if you a crook every house you break into ain't gonna be some timid person hiding in the corner... You run the risk of ? someone off. -
Article can be confusing cuz it says he was fleeing but was shot in the chest
so was he backpedaling?
none the less, imo it's justified... you break into someone's home that's the risk you take
if he was unarmed how would she kno?
if you break into my ? Ima assume you armed & shoot 1st, then sort the rest later -
Stay your ass out of other ppls houses
-
Article can be confusing cuz it says he was fleeing but was shot in the chest
so was he backpedaling?
none the less, imo it's justified... you break into someone's home that's the risk you take
if he was unarmed how would she kno?
if you break into my ? Ima assume you armed & shoot 1st, then sort the rest later
LOL @ backpedaling -
@Lemonpepper&paprika is tripping hard as ? yo
I don't think anyone is seriously celebrating the death of that young man but it's very hard to be as compassionate about this as some of the other Stand Your Ground cases that have rolled thru the IC
I don't care that she went home after her alarm went off, that's what she was supposed to do.
I don't care he didn't walk out with anything, I think her presence there prevented that. Let's not act like he took a quick tour of the place cause he was interested in the decor and was going to go about his merry way.
He was about that life and the game caught up to him. Sucks it happened so early in his life and with such final consequences but it is what it is. -
it be the dirtiest ? from the dirtiest aint never had ? ass families who be on some randomhood b&e ? . ..u gon rummage through someone house in the hood to peddle off some cheap bs....u might as well be a damn dopefiend...
the mentality a ? n the folks gotta that reared them gotta have to think that ? is a come up....jesus -
I don't disagree with anyone saying that the kid did some ? and then suffered the consequences of what happened. Cool. Can't argue with that.
But the same thing goes for this woman. If the article is correct and she shot him while he fled and there was no imminent danger...then she should suffer the consequences - which is jail.
I don't really see the difference if the argument is 'THIS action leads to THAT consequence'. -
She should be charged. Vigilante violence is commonplace in most 3rd world countries. If they let this slide, it'll open the door for more gun crazies "culling the herd."
If it was a black person killing a white person, she would have been "frog-marched" in front of the cameras. And (overzealous prosecutor's voice) charged to the fullest extent of the law.
We can't turn this into a referendum on bad parenting in the hood to justify the killing of this young man. -
The_Jackal wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »It's almost disgusting how little people value property and how much people value life. Regardless he was on here property when this occurred and the fact is he was shot in the chest. If he was fleeing he did a very poor job at that. Uncountable he was killed but there are consequences for your action and sometimes they are permanent. His family has no one to blame but themselves
When it comes to law, possession and property is something you don't mess with.
With that said, she didn't have the right to shoot if she wasn't inside the house.
Some of you guys are taking this quite personal. Interpreting it as if you were in the house. No one was home. She decided to be a vigilante and should face the consequences of her actions as he faced his.
BUt the report clearly states she was in her house.
As for the bolded It is a personal event for her. Your home is your shelter and your lifeline. She was justified in killing him.
naw man she wasnt at home. her security alarm went off. THEN she came back home. article says its not sure if she called the police or the security company did. But once the kid broke into her home, she was not there. but did make it back home before the kid got away.
That's what I meant she was literally in her house when she shot him. She went back home to defend her property -
I think that's the hitch of the SYG law, as long as he was in the homme she can say she was in imminent dangermryounggun wrote: »I don't disagree with anyone saying that the kid did some ? and then suffered the consequences of what happened. Cool. Can't argue with that.
But the same thing goes for this woman. If the article is correct and she shot him while he fled and there was no imminent danger...then she should suffer the consequences - which is jail.
I don't really see the difference if the argument is 'THIS action leads to THAT consequence'.
Was he going out to get a weapon?
Was he going to get friends?
What type of confrontation did they have?
The law as it is currently written protects her which a whole different thread in and of itself.
According to the law, she did nothing wrong and shouldn't see a lick of jail time. -
Smh @ y'all trying to get her arrested for protecting her own home...
-
Didn't read the story but how she look?
This will determine my answer -
imagine if he d been home you know doing homework or some ? .....
-
YES she raced to her house which she legally brought and owned. What exactly is a problem with that?
This is what the report says:The_Jackal wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »It's almost disgusting how little people value property and how much people value life. Regardless he was on here property when this occurred and the fact is he was shot in the chest. If he was fleeing he did a very poor job at that. Uncountable he was killed but there are consequences for your action and sometimes they are permanent. His family has no one to blame but themselves
When it comes to law, possession and property is something you don't mess with.
With that said, she didn't have the right to shoot if she wasn't inside the house.
Some of you guys are taking this quite personal. Interpreting it as if you were in the house. No one was home. She decided to be a vigilante and should face the consequences of her actions as he faced his.
BUt the report clearly states she was in her house.
As for the bolded It is a personal event for her. Your home is your shelter and your lifeline. She was justified in killing him.
She can also be forgiven for racing home when, on Thursday afternoon, her security system alerted her to another break-in at the property.
“The police told her don’t go in the house,”
Instead she went to
"inspect the exterior of the home"
"Went room to room"
"She observed a subject exiting the home through the rear,”
Then she took matters into her own hands and shot him. She went searching for trouble and found it. Key points, she wasn't home, he was unarmed,she went inside the home, she went straight for her gun, he ran, he died.
I hope she finds solace in her new home serving 8-10 years.
Yes the police told her not to go in. To bad that's her private property and she has rights.
And yes she looked for the person who illegally entered her home to rob her of her property and killed him. It's clear that he couldn't have been fleeing and running as you claim or he wouldn't have been shot in the chest. Unless you are implying he was running towards her.
She was justified regardlesd -
the dukester wrote: »She should be charged. Vigilante violence is commonplace in most 3rd world countries. If they let this slide, it'll open the door for more gun crazies "culling the herd."
If it was a black person killing a white person, she would have been "frog-marched" in front of the cameras. And (overzealous prosecutor's voice) charged to the fullest extent of the law.
We can't turn this into a referendum on bad parenting in the hood to justify the killing of this young man.
How is she a vigilante if she was defending her property? You ? are crazy -
The_Jackal wrote: »the dukester wrote: »She should be charged. Vigilante violence is commonplace in most 3rd world countries. If they let this slide, it'll open the door for more gun crazies "culling the herd."
If it was a black person killing a white person, she would have been "frog-marched" in front of the cameras. And (overzealous prosecutor's voice) charged to the fullest extent of the law.
We can't turn this into a referendum on bad parenting in the hood to justify the killing of this young man.
How is she a vigilante if she was defending her property. You ? are crazy
They not crazy bruh.
They just don't own ANYTHING of value. -
Article can be confusing cuz it says he was fleeing but was shot in the chest
so was he backpedaling?
none the less, imo it's justified... you break into someone's home that's the risk you take
if he was unarmed how would she kno?
if you break into my ? Ima assume you armed & shoot 1st, then sort the rest later
LOL @ backpedaling
lol I'm sayin
1 shot to the chest
it's some factors that come into play
the distance, what caliber, hollow tips or full metal jackets etc.
or was she a marksman? -
Lil og bobby johnson
-
These little ? deserve gunshot
-
Article can be confusing cuz it says he was fleeing but was shot in the chest
so was he backpedaling?
none the less, imo it's justified... you break into someone's home that's the risk you take
if he was unarmed how would she kno?
if you break into my ? Ima assume you armed & shoot 1st, then sort the rest later
LOL @ backpedaling
lol I'm sayin
1 shot to the chest
it's some factors that come into play
the distance, what caliber, hollow tips or full metal jackets etc.
or was she a marksman?
I feel ya, ? was just funny picturing him doing the back pedaling flee. -
Article can be confusing cuz it says he was fleeing but was shot in the chest
so was he backpedaling?
none the less, imo it's justified... you break into someone's home that's the risk you take
if he was unarmed how would she kno?
if you break into my ? Ima assume you armed & shoot 1st, then sort the rest later
LOL @ backpedaling
lol I'm sayin
1 shot to the chest
it's some factors that come into play
the distance, what caliber, hollow tips or full metal jackets etc.
or was she a marksman?
I feel ya, ? was just funny picturing him doing back pedaling flee.
? was leaving like
-
I think that's the hitch of the SYG law, as long as he was in the homme she can say she was in imminent dangermryounggun wrote: »I don't disagree with anyone saying that the kid did some ? and then suffered the consequences of what happened. Cool. Can't argue with that.
But the same thing goes for this woman. If the article is correct and she shot him while he fled and there was no imminent danger...then she should suffer the consequences - which is jail.
I don't really see the difference if the argument is 'THIS action leads to THAT consequence'.
Was he going out to get a weapon?
Was he going to get friends?
What type of confrontation did they have?
The law as it is currently written protects her which a whole different thread in and of itself.
According to the law, she did nothing wrong and shouldn't see a lick of jail time.
But...he wasn't shot in the home. The article says he exited through the rear of the house. It also says that she 'came out' and shot him.
As far as the rest, we'll see. Given the details as I understand them though, she should definitely go to jail. -
I cant take ? that protect thieves seriously
-
im surprised no one mentioned the resemblance to @700
-
Melanin_Enriched wrote: »I cant take ? that proctect thieves seriously
Not somebody stealing from a store that makes billions. But from a house.
? crazy
