• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched [W:700]

Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

Tell it to the judge.

There's a fair bit of legal precedence in these sorts of things.
Lessons learned from playing "Call of Duty" aren't exactly legal reasoning nor applicable to actual, likely, real-life situations, imho. ymmv.

No man an unarmed woman fleeing down an alley is just setting up a more beneficial tactical engagement.
After being tackled to the ground when you're an 80 year old man? Reasonable fear.

And while he's on the ground, he's justified in killing his attacker in self-defense. But next Thursday there isn't an imminent threat anymore.
 
Last edited:
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber


Already posted about the lack of pregnancy a few pages ago.

That said, I don't believe the journalist is very good, if he doesn't realize that at this point the police don't actually do the "charging," at this point it is up to the DA, iirc, the police may make the arrest, but they aren't doing the "charging".
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

After being tackled to the ground when you're an 80 year old man? Reasonable fear.
When Greer shot at the pair while they were in his house, he was well justified. If Greer had killed Miller while she was inside Greer's house, the homicide would have been justifiable. You are correct.

However, that's not what happened.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

No man an unarmed woman fleeing down an alley is just setting up a more beneficial tactical engagement.
;)

Women. Cant' trust a one of them.
;)
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

When Greer shot at the pair while they were in his house, he was well justified. If Greer had killed Miller while she was inside Greer's house, the homicide would have been justifiable. You are correct.

However, that's not what happened.

That's the position I took at the start of this thread. Because of a couple of posts who reminded me of the adrenalin rush that happens when we're fighting for our lives, I'm now willing to cut him some slack. When we are "the hunted," our more primitive brain functions take over, and we're not thinking rationally. I rather think that might be what happened here.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

When Greer shot at the pair while they were in his house, he was well justified. If Greer had killed Miller while she was inside Greer's house, the homicide would have been justifiable. You are correct.

However, that's not what happened.

That's what I said... I said had he shot them in the house during either when they approached him or after they tackled him or during the tackle it would have been "clean" so what was the point of any of the posts you just made again?
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

Of course it is.
Not legally.
You are, of course, entitled whatever personal opinion you care to hold.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

That's what I said... I said had he shot them in the house during either when they approached him or after they tackled him or during the tackle it would have been "clean" so what was the point of any of the posts you just made again?
To distinguish between the two periods of time which are each after Greer was knocked down.
The "after" closer to when Greer was knocked down is much different than the "after" when Greer is in the alley shooting a fleeing woman--but they are both after Greer was knocked down..
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

I can but I didn't want to hide what I originally wrote so I can show my error. If you don't like it, tough ****.

Your way is better anyway, I agree. If anyone quoted you pre-edit, and you went back and simply deleted the "offending" part, it would be a indication of low integrity, imo. The way you did it shows integrity of owning what you typed and corrected when wrong.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

That's the position I took at the start of this thread. Because of a couple of posts who reminded me of the adrenalin rush that happens when we're fighting for our lives, I'm now willing to cut him some slack. When we are "the hunted," our more primitive brain functions take over, and we're not thinking rationally. I rather think that might be what happened here.
While empathizing with his state of mind in that moment is understandable...
I don't think that Greer has much slack legally.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

I wouldn't want to try to defend this man if the D.A.'s office charges him for killing the woman. From what's been reported, several things would tend to work against him.

The two intruders, even though they roughed him up enough to break his collarbone, were both unarmed.

They let the homeowner get up and go to another room, where he got the gun. That tends to undercut the claim that he had good reason to fear he was in danger of death or great physical harm from them. He might just have locked himself away from them, or left the house, or phoned for help, and he could have pocketed the gun in the meantime, just in case they tried to attack him further.

He came back with the gun and shot at the two, even though by then they seemed to have turned away from him to search for things to steal.

He shot the woman in an alley, even though she had clearly submitted to him by pleading for him not to shoot.

He ignored her plea and shot her twice in the back.

He then dragged the woman back onto his property. That suggests he knew he had not shot her to defend himself but was trying to make it look more like he had.

If he is charged, the prosecution might claim he did not kill the woman to protect himself or anyone else from the threat of death or great bodily harm at her hands. They might argue that the real reason was that he knew, or thought he did, that the two had broken in on him before, and that was trying to make sure--by killing them both--that they could never do it again. But if that were reason enough, it would be all right to kill anyone who had committed a crime against you to keep him from ever doing it again, even is he had never put you at risk of death or serious injury.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

From the CNN report, the man had been robbed three times prior to this incident.

There was no mention they had robbed him before, but they did mention his fear was they'd just come back again if he didn't fight back.
They also mentioned this specific couple had a history of robbery.

At this point in time, I hope they don't charge the man with any crime at all.

CBS and CNN have differed in the facts presented. See: http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...eing-botched-robbery-v-18.html#post1063569238

According to CBS (linked above), "Police said both burglars were unarmed and that Greer told officers the same couple had robbed him at least twice previously."

This is why it's important to reserve judgment until all the facts are in. Both CBS and CNN are legit sources, but their info varies.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

This is why it's important to reserve judgment until all the facts are in. Both CBS and CNN are legit sources, but their info varies.

Reserve judgement? Come on , this is DP. We have legal experts here who are so astute they can determine what the defendent actually meant to say.

I just can remember the old adage about shooting a burglar in your house who is blown out the window and dragging him back inside to save your arse. With that said, I still believe shooting her down an alley is going to be a high hurdle. But it only my opinion,which at this point is about as misguided as any of the other legal experts here.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

See, this is the problem that I have. Pro lifers hold a hard-lined position about the rights of the unborn child. It does not matter if the mother is homeless, got raped, and/or is a murdering thief... the child is still innocent and needs protection. No ifs, ands or buts about it, except if she is shot by someone protecting his property. :roll: Not very consistent, and to me, it opens your no holds barred stance on abortion.
This is not about Pro Life and or Pro Choice. This is about what two scumbags got for beating an old man before trying to steal from him. So, its actually very consistent.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

The victim said this is the third time they have tried to rob him.

They suspects both climbed through his window, which are not big in a small apartment like that, and were wrestling with a safe when he walked in.

Does any of that give you an indication that the woman was actually pregnant?

This was the third time they have been there to rob him, but he made sure there would not be a fourth.

He did what he had to do.

I think the imminent threat in this case could be extended being that he could be sure they would try it again and they came close this time to killing him.
I have no problem with what he did, her death and the boyfriend being charged.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

If he chases her down the alley and shoots him in the back? Yes.

Sorry you have such little respect for your father. I would give him a medal.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

Sorry you have such little respect for your father. I would give him a medal.

:lol:
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

#299
It seems that CA law says that if you shoot them in your house after they break in, the law must assume that you were in reasonable fear and the homicide is justifiable.

It sounds like the statute sets up what's called a "rebuttable presumption" that a person's use of deadly force under those circumstances was justified. It doesn't automatically make the killing justifiable--it just shifts the burden to the prosecution to show it was not. And sometimes it will be able to do that.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

#102
The victim said this is the third time they have tried to rob him.

They suspects both climbed through his window, which are not big in a small apartment like that, and were wrestling with a safe when he walked in.

Does any of that give you an indication that the woman was actually pregnant?

This was the third time they have been there to rob him, but he made sure there would not be a fourth.

He did what he had to do.

I think the imminent threat in this case could be extended being that he could be sure they would try it again and they came close this time to killing him.

I once read a similar argument by a legal scholar regarding kidnap victims. The gist of it was that the "imminence" requirement for using deadly force should be relaxed for them. The argument recognized that a kidnap victim may be held for a long time, and all that time he can never be sure the kidnapper won't kill him at some point. And yet during that time, the kidnapper may slip up and give the victim opportunities to escape by using force--maybe deadly force. So, if any opportunity should present itself, the victim has to take advantage of it--even if, right at that moment, he was not in imminent danger of being killed by the kidnapper.

I like that argument--but I'm not sure how many legislators were ever persuaded to change the law where the killer is a kidnap victim. And in any case, the facts were nothing like that here. Unless California has enacted some statute that drastically changed the common law about self-defense, the fear an attacker may try again at some indefinite time, by itself, does not even begin to justify intentionally killing him.

In one case that finally went to the Supreme Court of the U.S., a woman who had just been beaten by her husband--probably not for the first time--went upstairs, got his gun, and came down again. She claimed he had again approached her and was about to corner her when she shot and killed him. But the jury didn't buy her self-defense claim, apparently because she went and got the gun instead of escaping.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

#102


I once read a similar argument by a legal scholar regarding kidnap victims. The gist of it was that the "imminence" requirement for using deadly force should be relaxed for them. The argument recognized that a kidnap victim may be held for a long time, and all that time he can never be sure the kidnapper won't kill him at some point. And yet during that time, the kidnapper may slip up and give the victim opportunities to escape by using force--maybe deadly force. So, if any opportunity should present itself, the victim has to take advantage of it--even if, right at that moment, he was not in imminent danger of being killed by the kidnapper.

I like that argument--but I'm not sure how many legislators were ever persuaded to change the law where the killer is a kidnap victim. And in any case, the facts were nothing like that here. Unless California has enacted some statute that drastically changed the common law about self-defense, the fear an attacker may try again at some indefinite time, by itself, does not even begin to justify intentionally killing him.

In one case that finally went to the Supreme Court of the U.S., a woman who had just been beaten by her husband--probably not for the first time--went upstairs, got his gun, and came down again. She claimed he had again approached her and was about to corner her when she shot and killed him. But the jury didn't buy her self-defense claim, apparently because she went and got the gun instead of escaping.

If she would have had her story be "I decided to hide the gun until the next time he hit me. I had had enough. There was no way he would ever let me leave and attempting to escape or slowly walk out the door only would have drew suspicion" she prolly could have got off whether they believed it or not, eventually, due to reasonable doubt.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robbery (Video) | Americans Against the Tea Party

I'm glad he killed her too. Those two criminals didn't hesitate to attack an old man and then they were so arrogant as to continue robbing him after they attacked him. I only wish he killed the man too.

If you want to make this a self-defense thing, you have a point. What gets me is that he's "extremely pleased." If you're extremely pleased about killing another human being, no matter the circumstances, there's something wrong with you.
 
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

You seem to have forgotten, Zimmerman didn't confront Trayvon at all.
Trayvon confronted him. Has to return to an area he was not in to do it. Either that, or he laid in wait.
Chasing somebody or uhmmm...... "repeatedly following somebody by runngin after them" is not "confronting them"?

You seem to be automatically equating Zimmerman's claims with "established facts". The only established fact in this case is that Martin was in the process of attacking Zimmerman when he was shot. How and why Martin came to attack Zimmerman was never established.
He deliberately shot Trayvon in self-defense. That is not negligence.

Spare me. Seeking out an avoidable confrontation after being advised by a competent authority not to is negligence. If you kill somebody while doing it, it is negligent homicide.

In this case, if one wants to carry a weapon for self defense, dont chase other citizens at night because you dont think they "belong" in "your" area. And espescially dont chase other citizens who are merely travelling to their home. If one want to be a chaser, one needs to leave the weapon at home.

But.... guys like Zimmerman think the weapon empowers them to do the chasing.
 
Last edited:
Re: 80-Year-Old Extremely Pleased About Killing Pregnant Woman Fleeing Botched Robber

Simple lesson here: When the media sticks a microphone in your face following an incident such as this, the best thing you can say is "No comment" and walk away.
 
Back
Top Bottom