Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well, I wonder why. Young black men comprise 7% of the population and produce 51% of the murders. Shame on you for perverting the actuality of this "crisis" created by the black community who screams 'how could you' while teaching her young to steal and kill on the sly. If they keep it up, forensics isn't far behind those with evil intent on their minds 24/7.He did call the cops and they arrested him. His other recourse would have been to load the body in the car, take a drive to a remote 300' deep abandoned well and gotten rid of it."Whaaaaah! Whaaaaaaah! We can't shoot unarmed black guys and go scot free!! Whaaaaaaah!"
This trigger-happy murderer should have done what Zimmerman should not have done at all: Call the cops.
You're asking people who protect their families to cover it up. Shame on you.
It's open season on young black men. The mistaken George Zimmerman verdict has taken its first victim.
Yes, I'm aware of that. I'm not saying that is a requirement. I'm saying that was a fortunate thing for Zimmerman that this guy does not have going for him. That, alone, is going to make it very hard for him to prevail merely because there are so many blacks calling for a sacrificial lamb. This may be it for them. And NOLA is 60% black.
could be along way down the road to a trial
there isnt much known about evidence at this time
the shooter claims the guy was reaching for something a weapon in his pocket
More on NOLAs Law:
La. R.S. 14:20 states, among other things, that a homicide is justifiable when committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
The statute says a homicide is justifiable when committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle ... against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle.
La. R.S. 14:21 states that the aggressor cannot claim self-defense unless he withdraws from the conflict in good faith and in such a manner that his adversary knows or should know that he desires to withdraw and discontinue the conflict.
Ask The Advocate: Castle Doctrine | Home | The Advocate ? Baton Rouge, LA
So in Louisiana retreat is required.
Yes, I'm aware of that. I'm not saying that is a requirement. I'm saying that was a fortunate thing for Zimmerman that this guy does not have going for him. That, alone, is going to make it very hard for him to prevail merely because there are so many blacks calling for a sacrificial lamb. This may be it for them. And NOLA is 60% black.
could be along way down the road to a trial
there isnt much known about evidence at this time
the shooter claims the guy was reaching for something a weapon in his pocket
More on NOLAs Law:
La. R.S. 14:20 states, among other things, that a homicide is justifiable when “committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.”
The statute says a homicide is justifiable when “committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle ... against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle.”
La. R.S. 14:21 states that the aggressor cannot claim self-defense “unless he withdraws from the conflict in good faith and in such a manner that his adversary knows or should know that he desires to withdraw and discontinue the conflict.”
Ask The Advocate: Castle Doctrine | Home | The Advocate ? Baton Rouge, LA
So in Louisiana retreat is required.
could be along way down the road to a trial
there isnt much known about evidence at this time
the shooter claims the guy was reaching for something a weapon in his pocket
More on NOLAs Law:
La. R.S. 14:20 states, among other things, that a homicide is justifiable when committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
The statute says a homicide is justifiable when committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle ... against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle.
La. R.S. 14:21 states that the aggressor cannot claim self-defense unless he withdraws from the conflict in good faith and in such a manner that his adversary knows or should know that he desires to withdraw and discontinue the conflict.
Ask The Advocate: Castle Doctrine | Home | The Advocate ? Baton Rouge, LA
So in Louisiana retreat is required.
no not really
§21. Aggressor cannot claim self defense
A person who is the aggressor or who brings on a difficulty cannot claim the right of self-defense unless he withdraws from the conflict in good faith and in such a manner that his adversary knows or should know that he desires to withdraw and discontinue the conflict.
could be along way down the road to a trial
there isnt much known about evidence at this time
the shooter claims the guy was reaching for something a weapon in his pocket
More on NOLAs Law:
La. R.S. 14:20 states, among other things, that a homicide is justifiable when committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
The statute says a homicide is justifiable when committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle ... against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle.
La. R.S. 14:21 states that the aggressor cannot claim self-defense unless he withdraws from the conflict in good faith and in such a manner that his adversary knows or should know that he desires to withdraw and discontinue the conflict.
Ask The Advocate: Castle Doctrine | Home | The Advocate ? Baton Rouge, LA
So in Louisiana retreat is required.
Under Castle Law the homeowner is not the aggressor or required to retreat. He will have to show this thug intended to break in, steal, rape or harm.
More on NOLAs Law:
Ask The Advocate: Castle Doctrine | Home | The Advocate ? Baton Rouge, LA
So in Louisiana retreat is required.
no not really
§21. Aggressor cannot claim self defense
A person who is the aggressor or who brings on a difficulty cannot claim the right of self-defense unless he withdraws from the conflict in good faith and in such a manner that his adversary knows or should know that he desires to withdraw and discontinue the conflict.
Depends on who they consider the aggressor.
Well, I wonder why. Young black men comprise 7% of the population and produce 51% of the murders. Shame on you for perverting the actuality of this "crisis" created by the black community who screams 'how could you' while teaching her young to steal and kill on the sly. If they keep it up, forensics isn't far behind those with evil intent on their minds 24/7.He did call the cops and they arrested him. His other recourse would have been to load the body in the car, take a drive to a remote 300' deep abandoned well and gotten rid of it.
You're asking people who protect their families to cover it up. Shame on you.
It's open season on young black men. The mistaken George Zimmerman verdict has taken its first victim.
Well, I wonder why. Young black men comprise 7% of the population and produce 51% of the murders. Shame on you for perverting the actuality of this "crisis" created by the black community who screams 'how could you' while teaching her young to steal and kill on the sly. If they keep it up, forensics isn't far behind those with evil intent on their minds 24/7.It's open season on young black men. The mistaken George Zimmerman verdict has taken its first victim.
I hope this dude had a home security system with cameras. I'm thinking of adding cameras to mine, but haven't made the decision quite yet.
Zimmerman Redux, Merritt Landry | Louisiana Self-defense - Downtrend.com
Hazouri reports that Landry, who has a baby daughter and whose wife is pregnant, believed that the victim was trying to break into his house. All I know is that Merritt had told his family that he had said: Freeze! and it looked like the guy turned at him and had his hand on his hip, Hazouri reported.
The rear door of Merritt Landrys home, and the driveway where car was parked, when Landry came upon intruder at 2:00AM.
Landry has been charged with attempted second degree murder. His bond was set to $10,000; he posted bond late Friday afternoon. Landry works for the City of New Orleans as a building inspector. The city says he has been placed on emergency suspension without pay pending the outcome of this case.
This is getting ridiculous. The prosecutor is going after this man only because he is a white man who killed a black man, and had it been a black man who killed that young man no one would have said shit.
Do people realize what this will lead to if it keeps up?
Do we realize what this will to lead to if it keeps up? Yes, it will lead to a serious reassessment of the right for every fool in America to have a gun and to shoot first and ask questions later. It will lead to equality in that if a black person shoots a white person or a white person shoots a black person, they will be arrested and treated equally by the law. That's what it will lead up to. The fact you think that whites are threatened by this kind of thing is pathetic. As a white, you expect to be able to shoot black people with no repercussions: well, guess what: there will be repercussions, and if you don't like it, move to an all white country.
Here is the saddest part of all that was entirely caused by the racist political attempted lynching of George Zimmerman.
"A local resident and friend of Landrys, Charles Hazouri, had security cameras on the exterior of the home which appear to have recorded the victim and a friend riding their bicycles up and down the street at 1:44AM. Earlier in the evening, another neighbor had seen the apparent friend biking around the neighborhood at 8:00PM. This neighbor, like Landry a white caucasian, considered calling the police, but decided against this for fear of being perceived as having racially profiled a kid whos just biking."
This mann would be home with his family & the thug would be locked in juvy detention had the neighbor called police 15 minutes earlier instead of fearing being labeled a racial profiler. But now there will just be a lot more dead teen ******* instead of getting a second chance in juvy detention.
The shooter is relying on the Louisiana Castle statute which is as follows:
§19. Use of force or violence in defense
A. The use of force or violence upon the person of another is justifiable when committed for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or a forcible offense or trespass against property in a person's lawful possession, provided that the force or violence used must be reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent such offense, and that this Section shall not apply where the force or violence results in a homicide.
B. For the purposes of this Section, there shall be a presumption that a person lawfully inside a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle held a reasonable belief that the use of force or violence was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle, if both of the following occur:
(1) The person against whom the force or violence was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.
(2) The person who used force or violence knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.
C. A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shall have no duty to retreat before using force or violence as provided for in this Section and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force.
D. No finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used force or violence in defense of his person or property had a reasonable belief that force or violence was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a forcible offense or to prevent the unlawful entry.
Acts 2006, No. 141, §1.
http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=78336
This was also reported in the NY Daily News:
A 14-year-old New Orleans boy was shot in the head early Friday morning after a homeowner said the unarmed teen was trying to break into his house.
Homeowner Merritt Landry, 33, who lives in Marigny, allegedly shot Marshall Coulter after fearing for his safety, and told friends and family he thought the teen had a gun.
New Orleans teen shot in the head by man who thought he was burglar: police - NY Daily News
Unfortunately, these types of statutes allow anyone to interpret then utilize them which leads to unnecessary injury or death. I do not have a problem with the man being arrested there will be an investigation and should the facts support his actions he will have be exonerated if not this could serve as a warning to those who may have a predisposition toward acting with out thinking.
This is an important point! People who have guns should not be going around shooting first and asking questions later. "Those who may have a predisposition toward acting without thinking" should not have guns!
Its an opinion piece, so I would like a better source.
Also, the boy does appear to have broken into the property, by scaling the fence, however, he wasn't inside the residence when he was shot. All the man needed to do was to keep an eye on the rear door and phone the police. He could have shot the boy if, and only if, he entered the property.
He is being charged because his life was not threatened. Someone comes onto your property, your life is not in danger until the assailant comes face to face with you.
According to the article:
"Merritt Landry, 33, fired one shot at a teen when he saw him in his front yard on Mandeville Street in the Marigny around 2 a.m., according to the NOPD."
According to the specific language of the Statute, the use of deadly force is not allowed unless the person against whom the deadly force is used was in the process of breaking in the dwelling or had already broken into the dwelling. Shooting someone who had merely trespassed into the yard is not justified.
Edited to add: I am assuming that the homeowner was inside the dwelling when he shot the intruder who was in the yard.
Do we realize what this will to lead to if it keeps up? Yes, it will lead to a serious reassessment of the right for every fool in America to have a gun and to shoot first and ask questions later. It will lead to equality in that if a black person shoots a white person or a white person shoots a black person, they will be arrested and treated equally by the law. That's what it will lead up to. The fact you think that whites are threatened by this kind of thing is pathetic. As a white, you expect to be able to shoot black people with no repercussions: well, guess what: there will be repercussions, and if you don't like it, move to an all white country.
The perp climbed a fence to access the man's property dumbass. What do you think he was doing there? Looking for his Skittles?
Calling people names only shows that you are the dumbass. It is not legal to shoot everyone who interests your yard, no matter what time of day or night.
It is not legal to shoot everyone who interests your yard, no matter what time of day or night.
You can in Texas. But it has to be at night.
But once you enter the home ....it's killing time 24-7.
"...Depends on who they consider the aggressor.
Its an opinion piece, so I would like a better source.
Also, the boy does appear to have broken into the property, by scaling the fence, however, he wasn't inside the residence when he was shot. All the man needed to do was to keep an eye on the rear door and phone the police. He could have shot the boy if, and only if, he entered the property.
He is being charged because his life was not threatened. Someone comes onto your property, your life is not in danger until the assailant comes face to face with you.
It is not legal to shoot everyone who interests your yard, no matter what time of day or night.
You can in Texas. But it has to be at night.
But once you enter the home ....it's killing time 24-7.
No - You can't shoot someone trespassing in your yard in Texas unless they are attempting to steal, vandalize or break in.
The use of deadly force to protect property is contained in Texas Penal Code§9.42. This section of the law lays out a couple of scenarios where you are justified in reasonably using deadly force to protect your property. The first is if someone is committing trespass or interference with your property and you must reasonably use deadly force to prevent arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the night time or criminal mischief during the night time. If someone is unlawfully on your property and attempting to commit any of these crimes, you will gain the legal justification for using deadly force.
The second scenario is the law of recovering your property by using deadly force. Texas has a 3-prong test that, if met, gives a justification in using deadly force to recover stolen property. This test is as follows: (1) force is necessary to prevent or terminate another's trespass on land or unlawful interference with the property, (2) deadly force is reasonably necessary to prevent another who is immediately fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the night time from escaping with the property, and (3) the person reasonably believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other method or that the use of non-deadly force to recover the property would expose them to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. Lawyers cannot stress enough that under this scenario, while the law may allow you to use deadly force - It Is Most Likely A Very Bad Idea!
Criminal trespass alone is not one of the crimes listed in Texas Penal Code §9.42 or even as part of the "Castle Doctrine" under §9.31 or §9.32. A mere criminal trespass may, however, evolve into one of the above crimes where you may be justified in using deadly force to protect your property. If someone decides to sit on your lawn, you holler at them from your bedroom window to "get off my property." If the trespasser refuses to leave, you are almost certainly not justified in using deadly force to remove him. But if that person sitting on your lawn gets up and charges towards your bedroom window with a firearm and a crow bar, you will very likely be legally justified in using deadly force to protect yourself and your home. His actions of charging you with a weapon make him more than just a trespasser under Texas law.
Coulter is the seventh of eight children. Coulter's 23-year-old brother, David Coulter, said he had largely raised the children after their father died three years ago of stomach cancer. David said he and his mother did his best to keep Marshall out of trouble.
Marshall Coulter, who had been on medication for attention deficit hyperactive disorder, was awaiting trial for "stealing stuff," his brother said.
"He would steal -- he was a professional thief, sure," David Coulter said
You can in Texas. But it has to be at night.
But once you enter the home ....it's killing time 24-7.
No - You can't shoot someone trespassing in your yard in Texas unless they are attempting to steal, vandalize or break in.
The use of deadly force to protect property is contained in Texas Penal Code§9.42. This section of the law lays out a couple of scenarios where you are justified in reasonably using deadly force to protect your property. The first is if someone is committing trespass or interference with your property and you must reasonably use deadly force to prevent arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the night time or criminal mischief during the night time. If someone is unlawfully on your property and attempting to commit any of these crimes, you will gain the legal justification for using deadly force.
The second scenario is the law of recovering your property by using deadly force. Texas has a 3-prong test that, if met, gives a justification in using deadly force to recover stolen property. This test is as follows: (1) force is necessary to prevent or terminate another's trespass on land or unlawful interference with the property, (2) deadly force is reasonably necessary to prevent another who is immediately fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the night time from escaping with the property, and (3) the person reasonably believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other method or that the use of non-deadly force to recover the property would expose them to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. Lawyers cannot stress enough that under this scenario, while the law may allow you to use deadly force - It Is Most Likely A Very Bad Idea!
Criminal trespass alone is not one of the crimes listed in Texas Penal Code §9.42 or even as part of the "Castle Doctrine" under §9.31 or §9.32. A mere criminal trespass may, however, evolve into one of the above crimes where you may be justified in using deadly force to protect your property. If someone decides to sit on your lawn, you holler at them from your bedroom window to "get off my property." If the trespasser refuses to leave, you are almost certainly not justified in using deadly force to remove him. But if that person sitting on your lawn gets up and charges towards your bedroom window with a firearm and a crow bar, you will very likely be legally justified in using deadly force to protect yourself and your home. His actions of charging you with a weapon make him more than just a trespasser under Texas law.
LOL...You have no imagination.
If it's dark and he's in my backyard,I promise you he will have a screwdriver or something of that nature in his hand.
But seriously. All you have to prove is that you were in fear for your life. If I go outside because the dogs are barking and find someone in the backyard and he makes a threatening move you can shoot him.
Look at the Joe Horn case. He shot two fools in his neighbors front yard after they broke into the home....in broad daylight. He walked.
