A Miami woman killed a teen burglar as he fled her home, police say. Should she be charged?
Options
Comments
-
When I saw "trayvon" I chuckled...But she's not at fault
-
? still ain't learned from Willie Manchester.... Stay yo ass up out people ?
-
I'm wondering which one of you ? would come home to a burglar in your ? and stop to ask him what his intent is?
Like seriously... #blacklivesmatter and all that ? , but not every battle needs to be fought. He and his fam gotta hold that L -
mryounggun wrote: »BOSSExcellence wrote: »1 less ? ? on the streets, fair.
i was typin a long drug out post to reply to @mryounggun and jus erased it and said ? it..
his life and death aint even worth my energy..
and then i saw the above post..
my sentiments exactly! lol
Damn, my ? . You gon' do ya fellow west coast brethren like that? Lol. Im hurt.
And I honestly don't know what y'all ? so up in arms about. Y'all act like I'm saying the kid was right to break into her house or some ? .
Eh, whatever. Like I said in another thread, some ? just ain't for me to understand, I guess. ? bless.
Also, ? where you been at the last 3 days on this ? @BOSSExcellence? This ? been going on since Monday or Tuesday, my ? .
in some Utah ? ! hahahaha -
BOSSExcellence wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »BOSSExcellence wrote: »1 less ? ? on the streets, fair.
i was typin a long drug out post to reply to @mryounggun and jus erased it and said ? it..
his life and death aint even worth my energy..
and then i saw the above post..
my sentiments exactly! lol
Damn, my ? . You gon' do ya fellow west coast brethren like that? Lol. Im hurt.
And I honestly don't know what y'all ? so up in arms about. Y'all act like I'm saying the kid was right to break into her house or some ? .
Eh, whatever. Like I said in another thread, some ? just ain't for me to understand, I guess. ? bless.
Also, ? where you been at the last 3 days on this ? @BOSSExcellence? This ? been going on since Monday or Tuesday, my ? .
in some Utah ? ! hahahaha
Them Beckys in Utah bout that life too.... lord I need to go back to Wasatch. -
I woulda blew that coach roach head off with a shotty
-
A....? it
-
Where in the ? world does going into your house that was just broken into to look and see what might be missing or damage done equal looking for a confrontation?
Of all the reasons not to blame a person looking for a confrontation I think you can let a person slide for looking for the muthfucka that broke in their house.
President Obama can't tell me not to go in my house without the secret service there to physically stop me from doing it. Its my ? house -
dallas' 4 eva wrote: »Like I said if you run the streets be ready for what comes with it, no sympathy for the lil ? at all.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mx6tex5JCbo -
-
Don't put yourself in a situation like that if you don't want to die. Saying she was wrong to shoot him takes away from the people who where actually wrongfully killed. He could've said I'm not doing this tonight and went home.
-
Wait the house been broken into before? His name is trayvon? Oh lawd
-
I wish i could ? strike that whole neighborhood
-
Clearly a lot of you ? have never EARNED a single thing in your life
There's ? I own that would be basically worthless to anyone else that I would STILL ? over because of the emotional attachment
You break into anything I own you're gambling with your life though period
-
Here's the applicable statute, the part in bold is the "stand your ground" provision.
The parts in bold and italicized is the standard. If the homeowner reasonably believed it was necessary to use deadly force to prevent a commission of felony, there's not a crime here.
Its tough to call because all the facts are not known...
776.031. Use or threatened use of force in defense of property
(1) A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such force.
(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be. -
Clearly a lot of you ? have never EARNED a single thing in your life
There's ? I own that would be basically worthless to anyone else that I would STILL ? over because of the emotional attachment
You break into anything I own you're gambling with your life though period
This the type of thing that confuses me. Because ? disagree with your outlook on it and view it differently...the never earned anything?
Maybe ? just disagree. -
And in FLA the act of entering someones property is burglary. You don't need to take anything, as soon as he crossed the threshold of her home he committed burglary. The circumstances will determine whether its 1st, 2nd or 3rd degree...
-
LOL @ "they don't understand why she felt the need to take matters into her own hands and not wait for the police"
As if the police would have showed up with cookies and offered the kid a job and mentorship. Nah they woulda shot his ass 15 times instead of once. -
She literally policed her community for the better but blacks would rather a white cop came thru
-
thegreatunknown wrote: »Here's the applicable statute, the part in bold is the "stand your ground" provision.
The parts in bold and italicized is the standard. If the homeowner reasonably believed it was necessary to use deadly force to prevent a commission of felony, there's not a crime here.
Its tough to call because all the facts are not known...
776.031. Use or threatened use of force in defense of property
(1) A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such force.
(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.
I'll do you one better from Florida State's Statues concerning their castle doctrine laws (which are some of the strongest in the nation)
776.013 Home protection; use or threatened use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great ? harm.—
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great ? harm to himself or herself or another when using or threatening to use defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great ? harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used or threatened was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses or threatens to use defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
In the eyes of the law she looks to be in the clear. If you break into people's houses you might die...end of story. -
thegreatunknown wrote: »Here's the applicable statute, the part in bold is the "stand your ground" provision.
The parts in bold and italicized is the standard. If the homeowner reasonably believed it was necessary to use deadly force to prevent a commission of felony, there's not a crime here.
Its tough to call because all the facts are not known...
776.031. Use or threatened use of force in defense of property
(1) A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such force.
(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.
I'll do you one better from Florida State's Statues concerning their castle doctrine laws (which are some of the strongest in the nation)
776.013 Home protection; use or threatened use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great ? harm.—
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great ? harm to himself or herself or another when using or threatening to use defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great ? harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used or threatened was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses or threatens to use defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
In the eyes of the law she looks to be in the clear. If you break into people's houses you might die...end of story.
Yeah that's applicable too, the defense attorney would have tried to argue against the "held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death" in (1) though... -
mryounggun wrote: »Clearly a lot of you ? have never EARNED a single thing in your life
There's ? I own that would be basically worthless to anyone else that I would STILL ? over because of the emotional attachment
You break into anything I own you're gambling with your life though period
This the type of thing that confuses me. Because ? disagree with your outlook on it and view it differently...the never earned anything?
Maybe ? just disagree.
How can you say that you're ok with someone breaking into your property and stealing things that you earned?
That doesn't make sense to me -
Hey hey hey.... spell that beautiful trap queens name properly.... it's NAUTIKA with a 'K' COOPER!!!! -
thegreatunknown wrote: »thegreatunknown wrote: »Here's the applicable statute, the part in bold is the "stand your ground" provision.
The parts in bold and italicized is the standard. If the homeowner reasonably believed it was necessary to use deadly force to prevent a commission of felony, there's not a crime here.
Its tough to call because all the facts are not known...
776.031. Use or threatened use of force in defense of property
(1) A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such force.
(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.
I'll do you one better from Florida State's Statues concerning their castle doctrine laws (which are some of the strongest in the nation)
776.013 Home protection; use or threatened use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great ? harm.—
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great ? harm to himself or herself or another when using or threatening to use defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great ? harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used or threatened was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses or threatens to use defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
In the eyes of the law she looks to be in the clear. If you break into people's houses you might die...end of story.
Yeah that's applicable too, the defense attorney would have tried to argue against the "held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death" in (1) though...
The news report said that there was some sort of confrontation before she shot..and since he was shot in the chest and not the back they could just paint the picture that she came home and found him there and had no idea what he was going to do or what he was armed with and he came at her so she fired off in defense of her self and her home.
I don't see her getting charged here -
mryounggun wrote: »Clearly a lot of you ? have never EARNED a single thing in your life
There's ? I own that would be basically worthless to anyone else that I would STILL ? over because of the emotional attachment
You break into anything I own you're gambling with your life though period
This the type of thing that confuses me. Because ? disagree with your outlook on it and view it differently...the never earned anything?
Maybe ? just disagree.
How can you say that you're ok with someone breaking into your property and stealing things that you earned?
That doesn't make sense to me
Show me where I said I'm ok with people stealing things I've earned.
https://youtu.be/2ZGSQXmJPaQ
