Page 95 of 111 FirstFirst ... 45859394959697105 ... LastLast
Results 941 to 950 of 1109

Thread: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

  1. #941
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by Aderleth View Post
    He wasn't being attacked when he fired the gun. If you look at the statute for self defense it requires a reasonable belief that one is or is about to be attacked. We have no indication of such a thing here. Moreover, valid use of lethal force in defense of self/others requires both that one is being attacked with lethal force (or impending threat of great bodily harm) and a reasonable belief that lesser force would be insufficient to end the threat. None of these criteria were met under the facts of this case as we know them. Therefore there was no self defense. Case closed.
    Despite the fact they have a confession,evidence and witness that one of the property owners shot at the burglars those property owners were not charged with murder. They are not sitting behind bars right now. Now obviously the grand jury or whoever decided that what the property did met the requirements for self defense or that they did not commit a crime despite having evidence one of them shot the burglar.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  2. #942
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,422
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by Aderleth View Post
    He wasn't being attacked when he fired the gun. If you look at the statute for self defense it requires a reasonable belief that one is or is about to be attacked. We have no indication of such a thing here. Moreover, valid use of lethal force in defense of self/others requires both that one is being attacked with lethal force (or impending threat of great bodily harm) and a reasonable belief that lesser force would be insufficient to end the threat. None of these criteria were met under the facts of this case as we know them. Therefore there was no self defense. Case closed.
    Haven't read the thread. But I knew a guy once who repelled a carjacker, then backed up, got out, and beat him some more. He went to jail for GOING BACK. The initial beating was perfectly legal.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  3. #943
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,422
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Despite the fact they have a confession,evidence and witness that one of the property owners shot at the burglars those property owners were not charged with murder. They are not sitting behind bars right now. Now obviously the grand jury or whoever decided that what the property did met the requirements for self defense or that they did not commit a crime despite having evidence one of them shot the burglar.
    OJ was acquitted too, then lost a wrongful death civil suit.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  4. #944
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Despite the fact they have a confession,evidence and witness that one of the property owners shot at the burglars those property owners were not charged with murder. They are not sitting behind bars right now. Now obviously the grand jury or whoever decided that what the property did met the requirements for self defense or that they did not commit a crime despite having evidence one of them shot the burglar.
    but apparently, matlock here knows more about the case than those who were actually involved, therefore the property owners are guilty of murder. the fact that there was not enough evidence to bring them to trial (despite the confession) apparently is irrelevent in the face of our own forum perry mason's OPINION
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  5. #945
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    OJ was acquitted too, then lost a wrongful death civil suit.
    and thusly, OJ is also not a murderer.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  6. #946
    Guru
    Aderleth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-08-16 @ 06:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,294

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    yeah right, perry mason, you've been saying the same thing for the last 70 pages.
    And yet you keep falling back on that crutch, even though I've explained why doing so is idiotic. What's up with that?

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    bolded is the key. we don't know all the facts. therefore you have made various assumptions. all of which have painted the property owners in the worst possible light.
    Obviously we don't know all the facts - which is why I've repeatedly asked you to apply the facts as we know them - and I've made absolutely no assumptions. Here are the facts that I'm relying on, all of which come from the article:

    1) The 3 men opened fire on two trespassers.

    2) As a result of their intentional use of deadly force, one trespasser was killed. No one - certainly not the perpetrators - have suggested that this was in any way an accidental shooting.

    3) At the time of the shooting, we have absolutely no indication that the trespassers attempted to threaten the lives of these three men. No one appears to have made that argument.

    Do you disagree that these are the facts as we know them? By this I emphatically not mean "can you concoct any number of conjectural possibilities that might change the situation."

  7. #947
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by Leo View Post
    I take your point James, and it is obvious that he was not a minor. I merely pointed out that many people, and not particularly elderly ones, still regard me as a kid, despite the fact that I turned 18 recently. He was only two years older, so perhaps to some people - he was a kid.
    There was still no other reason to use the term kid for this scumbag other than to fraudulently paint him as a child or minor.



    Those people are not scumbags for having some sympathy with his death.
    They are still scumbag sympathizers IE people who have misplaced their sympathies and sympathize with scumbags.

    No one can get into someone else's mind, and divine their intentions, so we must be guided by the balance of probability. He was being chased by men with guns, and he ran into a shed. The balance of probability is that he was seeking shelter, and to hide from these men.
    It is because you do not know what that burglar is going do why lethal force is justified.


    Of course, he could have had military weapons cached there, perhaps an RPG.
    What good that that do other than getting himself blown up?
    RPG Minimum Arming Distance: 5 Meters | The Real Revo



    It is fact that initially, he was trespassing, and it would be a reasonable assumption that he intended to steal something. However, the facts as reported, indicate that he was being confronted by three armed men, his partner in crime fled over the fence, and he ran to a nearby shed. All the circumstances, and common sense, point to his attempting to remove himself from immediate danger as quickly as possible. This could reasonably be regarded as attempting to flee.
    If he attempted to flee then why not go the way his buddy went? people do not want to get caught and will sometimes do what ever it takes to keep themselves from getting caught including harming the occupants of that property.

    That depends upon the jurisdiction. In the UK, Norfolk farmer Tony Martin was initially sentenced to life imprisonment for doing exactly that - lying in wait for burglars, and then shooting one of them dead.
    The fact that man was even tried is atrocious. It makes the statement that criminals matter more than you and that you have no right to defend yourself or property.

    The Conservatives have made attempts to change the law to allow things like that, but have been unsuccessful so far. The self-defence law does not need unreasonable changes | Issy McCann | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
    Hopefully they make more attempts.
    Your ad hominems towards all Europeans do you little credit, and do not enhance your case. I should avoid that tactic if I were you. Debate the facts, as reported, of this issue, and people may have more regard for what you have to say.
    The fact your country would prosecute a property owner for using lethal force to defend himself and property means that the only people your justice system gives a **** about are the criminals. So it is not not a ad hominem to state that I am surprised your country has not banned rape victims from defending themselves.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  8. #948
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by Aderleth View Post
    And yet you keep falling back on that crutch, even though I've explained why doing so is idiotic. What's up with that?



    Obviously we don't know all the facts - which is why I've repeatedly asked you to apply the facts as we know them - and I've made absolutely no assumptions. Here are the facts that I'm relying on, all of which come from the article:

    1) The 3 men opened fire on two trespassers.

    2) As a result of their intentional use of deadly force, one trespasser was killed. No one - certainly not the perpetrators - have suggested that this was in any way an accidental shooting.

    3) At the time of the shooting, we have absolutely no indication that the trespassers HAD NOT attempted to threaten the lives of these three men. No one appears to have made that argument.

    Do you disagree that these are the facts as we know them? By this I emphatically not mean "can you concoct any number of conjectural possibilities that might change the situation."
    editted for truth and accuracy. you assume that the trespassers (nice way to try to minimize their criminality. "oh they weren't thieves or robbers.....they were just trespassers" how very intellectually honest of you) were not posing a threat. you weren't there so you have no clue.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  9. #949
    Guru
    Aderleth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-08-16 @ 06:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,294

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Despite the fact they have a confession,evidence and witness that one of the property owners shot at the burglars those property owners were not charged with murder. They are not sitting behind bars right now. Now obviously the grand jury or whoever decided that what the property did met the requirements for self defense or that they did not commit a crime despite having evidence one of them shot the burglar.
    You and I have been over this ad nauseum. The two juries reached factual conclusions that are mutually exclusive using the same standard of proof. The only possible conclusion is that at least one of the juries did not do what it was supposed to do. Therefore it's impossible to rely on either set of jury-based conclusions. One of them must be wrong, and there's no way for us to know which one. So, by saying "the grand jury didn't indict, therefore they're not murders," you're making a specious argument. What would make far more sense would be to stop appealing to a thoroughly dubious authority, use your brain, and apply the facts to the law. Can you please, for the love of God, stop screwing around and actually do that?

  10. #950
    Guru
    Aderleth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-08-16 @ 06:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,294

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    editted for truth and accuracy. you assume that the trespassers (nice way to try to minimize their criminality. "oh they weren't thieves or robbers.....they were just trespassers" how very intellectually honest of you) were not posing a threat. you weren't there so you have no clue.
    So you agree that they had not attempted to threaten the lives of the three property owners? Good. Then, if you look to the relevant Colorado statute, you'll find that the property owners did not have a valid basis for use of deadly force.

    By the way, yes, they were just trespassers at that point. They hadn't yet stolen anything.

Page 95 of 111 FirstFirst ... 45859394959697105 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •