14 y.o. black intrudor shot and killed in Louisiana, white home owner arrested.

[JimBowie1958]

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 Landry’s 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?

Everyone knows that in Louisianna, "Freeze" means "shoot"! Just ask the Japanese.

Only for dumbasses that trespass at night time, dumbass.

 

[Noomi]

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.

Of course the shooting wasn't justified. You don't shoot someone because you think they might be going to break into your house. You lock your damned door and phone the police, like any other normal, responsible person would do.

So, the guy with the gun is the numbskull, but the kid who scaled a fense onto someone else's property is what? A genius?

You guys are fucked in the head.

The boy shouldn't have scaled the fence and entered someone's property, but he hadn't even attempted to break into the home when he was shot. Just because someone trespasses on your property does not automatically mean they are going to break in.

What was this 14 year old kid doing at 2 in the morning, scaling a fence to get in someone's backyard in the first place?

I would have waited until he broke into the house and then blew him away up close so there's no need for a hospital.

You know the guy who broke into the New Jersey home and beat up the woman there was unarmed right? No weapon. If she shot him, she too would have shot an unarmed black man.

Its not relevant as to why he wasn't tucked up in bed. The idiot who owned the house decided that instead of locking his doors and phoning the police, he'd go hunting ******* instead.

What was the kid doing trespassing, climbing over locked gated, at 2am?

How was the home owner to know the kid wasn't going to break in?

IMHO, the homeowner did nothing wrong what-so-ever.

There is nothing "obvious" that the kid was taking a short cut.

Doesn't the idea of private property mean anything to anyone anymore?

According to the law, as posted by The Professor, the man did indeed commit a crime.

ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS ?????

you need to attend a safe gun handling class......., ooops....! i forgot, you are in Australia, that aside, in my self defense class the instructor and CCW instructor both instruct from an FBI, approved class on when to use your weapon to take out a perp, so let's determine what your definition of "F2F" means.. OK?

Yeah, I am serious, you useless sack of shit.

Know what we'd do if someone trespassed on our property? Lock the doors, and call the cops and tell them of a home invasion in progress.

That's the responsible thing to do. Defend yourself with deadly force if the intruders enter your home, but we don't shoot first and ask questions later.

Too many gun nuts in America.

 

[Noomi]

i hope the little black thief dies

He's a thief? What did he steal?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Of course the shooting wasn't justified. You don't shoot someone because you think they might be going to break into your house. You lock your damned door and phone the police, like any other normal, responsible person would do.

The guy shot home because he was in his yard after climbing over a locked gate and he thought he made a threatening move after he confronted him. That is slightly different than your version of events.

The boy shouldn't have scaled the fence and entered someone's property, but he hadn't even attempted to break into the home when he was shot. Just because someone trespasses on your property does not automatically mean they are going to break in.

That might be a reasonable argument to make if he hadn't already climbed over a gate to get into the yard. It isn't like he went into the yard to avoid a pothole in the street.

Its not relevant as to why he wasn't tucked up in bed. The idiot who owned the house decided that instead of locking his doors and phoning the police, he'd go hunting ******* instead.

It is relevant because it might explain why he was climbing into locked yards at 2 AM.

What was the kid doing trespassing, climbing over locked gated, at 2am?

According to the law, as posted by The Professor, the man did indeed commit a crime.

I have no idea what law The PRofessor posted, but the actual self defense laws in Louisanna make it very unlikely that he committed a crime.

Yeah, I am serious, you useless sack of shit.

Know what we'd do if someone trespassed on our property? Lock the doors, and call the cops and tell them of a home invasion in progress.

That's the responsible thing to do. Defend yourself with deadly force if the intruders enter your home, but we don't shoot first and ask questions later.

Too many gun nuts in America.

Let me get this straight, if you went outside to find out if your dog had treed the cat next door again and were confronted by an intruder in your locked yard you would simply lock the door and wait for the police to show up?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

i hope the little black thief dies

He's a thief? What did he steal?

He stole the Landry family's peace of mind.

 

[Noomi]

The guy shot home because he was in his yard after climbing over a locked gate and he thought he made a threatening move after he confronted him. That is slightly different than your version of events.

He THOUGHT that the boy was reaching for a weapon. Did the boy actually have a weapon? Are black kids even able to put their hands in their pockets without some white person thinking they have a weapon?

That might be a reasonable argument to make if he hadn't already climbed over a gate to get into the yard. It isn't like he went into the yard to avoid a pothole in the street.

He wasn't breaking into the house. He was guilty of trespassing, not breaking and entering.

It is relevant because it might explain why he was climbing into locked yards at 2 AM.

Even so, you don't shoot and ask questions later.

I have no idea what law The PRofessor posted, but the actual self defense laws in Louisanna make it very unlikely that he committed a crime.

The law, as written, states that the man committed a crime. I think its posted on the 2nd or 3rd page.

Let me get this straight, if you went outside to find out if your dog had treed the cat next door again and were confronted by an intruder in your locked yard you would simply lock the door and wait for the police to show up?

No - I would already be outside. If I was inside the house, saw an intruder, I would ensure the doors were locked and phone the cops. Ignoring the fact that I have three dogs, who are excellent guard dogs and would rip any intruder to shreds.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He THOUGHT that the boy was reaching for a weapon. Did the boy actually have a weapon? Are black kids even able to put their hands in their pockets without some white person thinking they have a weapon?

It doesn't matter if he was or not, all that matters is if it is reasonable for him to think he was reaching for a weapon. Given the circumstances of it being 2 AM and him being inside his locked property it seems reasonable to me.

He wasn't breaking into the house. He was guilty of trespassing, not breaking and entering.

Doesn't matter, he was obviously breaking the law, and thus loses the right to claim he was there legally.

Even so, you don't shoot and ask questions later.

You prefer he wait to get shot before he defend himself? Would you rather be reading about how he was killed and his wife was raped?

The law, as written, states that the man committed a crime. I think its posted on the 2nd or 3rd page.

I posted the statute for second degree murder, self defense, and justifiable homicide. Believe it or not, self defense does not require him to wait to be attacked in Louisianan anymore than it does in Australia.

No - I would already be outside. If I was inside the house, saw an intruder, I would ensure the doors were locked and phone the cops. Ignoring the fact that I have three dogs, who are excellent guard dogs and would rip any intruder to shreds.

He was not inside the house, he was outside trying to figure out why his dog was barking. Until you get that part down you aren't talking about the facts we have in this case.

 

[Noomi]

He still had no reason to shoot, in my opinion.

Lets just see what eventuates. Charges have been laid, it will be interesting to see if they are dropped.

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

We're not allowed to shoot suspicious people skulking about our exterior property, unless they're shooting into your home; then all bets are off. Once the perpetrator actually gets into your home, then your response is guided by what state you live in. Some states expect you to leave the home and call the police and that if you stay in the home, you still may not use deadly force unless actually threatened with some type of weapon (gun, knife, bat, et cetera). And of course, some states are generous and say that if the burglar has the audacity to climb into your home, you can use deadly force, period.
I'm in favor of the latter, regardless of the intruder's age (well, up to a point). A 14 year old, black, white, asian or other, is fair game as far as I'm concerned.
Two teens broke into my nephew's home at night many years ago, in Minnesota. He shot and killed them both, however, because they did not have weapons on them and they weren't actually attacking him, he had to serve a few years in prison for it. That, as far as I am concerned, was a raw deal.

 

[theHawk]

He still had no reason to shoot, in my opinion.

Lets just see what eventuates. Charges have been laid, it will be interesting to see if they are dropped.

Noomi, how can you possibly argue that a trespasser enountered at 2AM wouldn't be preceived as a threat to someone?
If you would rather just call the police, that is your choice, but a man still has the right to defend his own home and family on his own. Attempting to call the police doesn't automatically mean you'll be safe. It still takes a lot of time for them to show up.

When such a thing happens, you have to assume the worse. The intruder might possibly have accomplices, and be armed. I don't think you have any idea how common home invasions are in the US. Armed men raid homes, rape and kill women, steal what they want. Of course our liberal media ignores these stories, because it does not fit into their progressive agenda.

Someone on your property at 2AM doesn't have good intentions. I can tell you if I ever see anyone on my property that late at night, I am getting my gun. Yes, I would probably call the police, but I would not simply hide in a closet and wait.



This man was a coworker of a friend of mine: Home invasion leads to fatal gunfight - San Antonio Express-News
Later on gang bangers did drive by shootings at his house in retaliation of him defending his own home.

 

[Noomi]

He still had no reason to shoot, in my opinion.

Lets just see what eventuates. Charges have been laid, it will be interesting to see if they are dropped.

Noomi, how can you possibly argue that a trespasser enountered at 2AM wouldn't be preceived as a threat to someone?
If you would rather just call the police, that is your choice, but a man still has the right to defend his own home and family on his own. Attempting to call the police doesn't automatically mean you'll be safe. It still takes a lot of time for them to show up.

When such a thing happens, you have to assume the worse. The intruder might possibly have accomplices, and be armed. I don't think you have any idea how common home invasions are in the US. Armed men raid homes, rape and kill women, steal what they want. Of course our liberal media ignores these stories, because it does not fit into their progressive agenda.

Someone on your property at 2AM doesn't have good intentions. I can tell you if I ever see anyone on my property that late at night, I am getting my gun. Yes, I would probably call the police, but I would not simply hide in a closet and wait.



This man was a coworker of a friend of mine: Home invasion leads to fatal gunfight - San Antonio Express-News
Later on gang bangers did drive by shootings at his house in retaliation of him defending his own home.

I never said the kid wasn't a threat, but shooting him because you assume he had a weapon is just overkill, and not necessary, IMO.
The owner has reason to question why the hell someone has climbed over his fence and entered his property, but I consider it excessive that he could just shoot and severely injure someone because he assumed that the boy was planning to break into his home.

Perhaps its because I live in a country, and in an area where I don't have to concern myself with break ins. Who knows.

 

[jon_berzerk]

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 be exonerated, if not this could serve as a warning to those who may have a predisposition toward acting without thinking.

14:19 only if the kid survives

 

[Connery]

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 be exonerated, if not this could serve as a warning to those who may have a predisposition toward acting without thinking.

14:19 only if the kid survives

Even if the 14 year old dies and if the requisite elements are present. "...the law said the use of force was justifiable when preventing an offense against one's personal safety or the safety of one's property, but only if the amount of forced used was "reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent such offense."

The law also stated homicide was justifiable in similar cases: when committed in self-defense by one who "reasonably believes" he is in danger of great bodily harm or death; to prevent a forcible felony; and to prevent trespass on private property"
Understanding Louisiana's Stand-Your-Ground and Castle Laws | NOLA.com

Thereafter La. R.S. 14:20 or La. R.S. 14:21 may apply depending on the facts.

 

[Ravi]

Zimmerman Redux, Merritt Landry | Louisiana Self-defense - Downtrend.com



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?

I can see how this could happen. 1:44 Am guys at home with pregnant wife and kid. Dog starts barking,somebody jumps over an Iron fence into a yard so you automatacally assume he is up to no good and he is ready to confront you cause your car is there and he knows your home. You yell freeze and the guy turns with his hand on his hip, might have a gun. It's dark,it's 1:44 am, you just woke up,all kids should be in bed right? So Landry fires thinking he's about to become a victim himself.

People really responsible for this are the parents. At 14 that kid should have been home safely tucked in bed, not wandering the streets.

I did a lot of reading on this case when the story broke. A couple of things come to mind. One, his wife is pregnant. Two, there was a home invasion just a couple of blocks away, a couple of hours before. Don't ask for the link, I am full of good BBQ and not a few beers. But those facts right there are enough to say he was probably a bit twitchy about defending his family to the best of his ability.

The main reason I wish he wouldn't have shot the kid is because he is a dad with one on the way. He's a good guy. He shouldn't be out on bail, and waiting for trial. I think he made a stupid mistake.

In other words, he was too emotional to possess a gun.

 

[theHawk]

Perhaps its because I live in a country, and in an area where I don't have to concern myself with break ins. Who knows.

Not everyone has the privilege to live in such a country. The US is becoming overrun with minorities, poor, and criminals. The government isn't doing anything to fix the problem either.

 

[Esmeralda]

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.

Of course the shooting wasn't justified. You don't shoot someone because you think they might be going to break into your house. You lock your damned door and phone the police, like any other normal, responsible person would do.

So, the guy with the gun is the numbskull, but the kid who scaled a fense onto someone else's property is what? A genius?

You guys are fucked in the head.

The boy shouldn't have scaled the fence and entered someone's property, but he hadn't even attempted to break into the home when he was shot. Just because someone trespasses on your property does not automatically mean they are going to break in.



Its not relevant as to why he wasn't tucked up in bed. The idiot who owned the house decided that instead of locking his doors and phoning the police, he'd go hunting ******* instead.

What was the kid doing trespassing, climbing over locked gated, at 2am?

How was the home owner to know the kid wasn't going to break in?

IMHO, the homeowner did nothing wrong what-so-ever.

There is nothing "obvious" that the kid was taking a short cut.

Doesn't the idea of private property mean anything to anyone anymore?

According to the law, as posted by The Professor, the man did indeed commit a crime.

ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS ?????

you need to attend a safe gun handling class......., ooops....! i forgot, you are in Australia, that aside, in my self defense class the instructor and CCW instructor both instruct from an FBI, approved class on when to use your weapon to take out a perp, so let's determine what your definition of "F2F" means.. OK?

Yeah, I am serious, you useless sack of shit.

Know what we'd do if someone trespassed on our property? Lock the doors, and call the cops and tell them of a home invasion in progress.

That's the responsible thing to do. Defend yourself with deadly force if the intruders enter your home, but we don't shoot first and ask questions later.

Too many gun nuts in America.

Exactly right!

 

[KissMy]

The problem arises here because it doesn't sound like the intruder actually ever confronted the homeowner, but was merely trespassing or maybe even criminal trespassing. Trespass in and of itself would not invoke reasonable fear, particularly if you were inside your house and the perp was outside. This is not a duplicate scenario with the Zimmerman case.

Castle law allows shoot to kill if attempting burglarly. If this thug left his bike outside the fence or had burglary tool or forcefuly damaged the home it is proof enough he was not cutting through, but intended to enter the home. Shoot to kill is legal if he was in the yard intending to enter a home.

You can't shoot if they are there just to yell at your daughter from the yard.

 

[JoeB131]

[

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?

People will be held accountable when they murder people with guns?

Frankly, I don't want homeowners going around shooting kids who wanderinto their driveways...

I'm not sure why you do.

 

[Skull Pilot]

It was 2 AM

The home owner told the asshole to freeze
The asshole then reached to his hip

I would assume that he was going fora weapon
A cop would assume he was going for a weapon

A cop would shoot the asshole.

So why shouldn't the home owner shoot the asshole?

 

[Connery]

It was 2 AM

The home owner told the asshole to freeze
The asshole then reached to his hip

I would assume that he was going fora weapon
A cop would assume he was going for a weapon

A cop would shoot the asshole.

So why shouldn't the home owner shoot the asshole?

Because in a similar situation, "Donald Aaron was found guilty of negligent homicide in the 2005 shooting death of Ronald Jamison in Caddo Parish. Upon arriving home, Aaron found Jamison in his driveway. Aaron said he believed Jamison had burglarized his home. When Jamison reached into his pocket to grab a beer bottle, Aaron opened fire, shooting him seven times.

Aaron said he was in the right to shoot Jamison under the state's castle laws. The grand jury disagreed, charging him with manslaughter. A trial jury found him guilty of the lesser charge of negligent homicide and a gun offense. He was sentenced to five years hard labor without parole." That is why.

Understanding Louisiana's Stand-Your-Ground and Castle Laws | NOLA.com