White man shoots very drunk black woman breaking into his house. Charged w murder

[Mad_Cabbie]

I'm wondering if this guy was half asleep?

 

[jon_berzerk]

I'm wondering if this guy was half asleep?

it is considered that what you say right after an event

is probably the most truthful

i have read some history on the guy

had a temper at one time

he put a restraining order on a past girlfriend

so responded likewise

it was a matter that he owed her 3 grand

when it came up

he put 3 grand in her door

he inherited the house

that is about all i know about him

at this point

i think i read that he was awoken to banging on his side door first

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

That leads me to believe that he might have been in a wrong frame of mind to pick up a gun.

 

[Iceman]

It's abundantly clear to me, at least, that this girl was in need of help and not out on some robbery spree. You see this too, correct?

most likely in hindsight but we do not know for sure

and then how was the guy supposed to know that

she was still really wasted at the time of the shooting

If she had broken in and was threatening me or my family

we do not know what words had been exchanged if any

however the states witness says that the screen was knocked out

from the outside of the house before the shot was fired

because of trajectory the height of the girl and the shooter

and the distance of the firearm to the girls head

now if someone is knocking apart my door at 4 in the morning

i would think someone was trying to get in

what is unsettling for me is in the moment

he claimed he accidentally fired

the states witness did not do a very good job

at pointing out the strength needed to pull the trigger either

i will say this does need to go to trial

to sort it all out

This does not look very good for the home owner, who should have at least questioned the girl at the front door.

He does not have a very good case.

he certainly has some issues to deal with

saying he accidentally shot her

in the beginning and then now claiming self defense

will come back to bite him in the ass

Never talk to the cops, EVER. They work for the prosecution, and are always looking for a collar. He should have just called the police and lawyered up, regardless of whether it was self defense or an accidental discharge.

 

[Zona]

There's a lot for a good defense lawyer to work with, starting with the crime riddled city, the lack of police presence, and the state of mind of a man living among such conditions when startled out of bed at 3am to a dark figure trying to break in.

State of mind can get this guy off. A good attorney can make the case.

She was NOT trying to break in. That is why this guy will do time. All the things you mentioned does not matter because of the fact that she was NOT trying to break in. He was not in fear for his life and I hope he does at least 15 years for killing this unarmed girl.

Fuck him.

Zona, you mad?

Nope. Will you be when he goes away for 15 years for shooting an unarmed woman? Pussies.

 

[Zona]

That's a tough call. Police don't always come, do they? Or if they do come, it may be a long time. I can see the jury, if there is one, using jury nullification on this case.

What if it was a armed burglary and the man was in real danger?

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the killer walks. It's a fucked up world we live in.

So you know all the facts of the case...You are 100% certain of the man's guilt?
Ok, now let's see how say you if the defendant is your brother or son...
And don't give me any nonsense such as "well they wouldn't be there in the first place".

Right now, I am more looking at the victim like she is my daughter and I say let this guy burn for shooting an unarmed woman in the face on his porch.

 

[Iceman]

She was NOT trying to break in. That is why this guy will do time. All the things you mentioned does not matter because of the fact that she was NOT trying to break in. He was not in fear for his life and I hope he does at least 15 years for killing this unarmed girl.

Fuck him.

Zona, you mad?

Nope. Will you be when he goes away for 15 years for shooting an unarmed woman? Pussies.

You not mad he blew her face off? What are you, some white supremacist?

 

[Iceman]

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the killer walks. It's a fucked up world we live in.

So you know all the facts of the case...You are 100% certain of the man's guilt?
Ok, now let's see how say you if the defendant is your brother or son...
And don't give me any nonsense such as "well they wouldn't be there in the first place".

Right now, I am more looking at the victim like she is my daughter and I say let this guy burn for shooting an unarmed woman in the face on his porch.

If Obama had a daughter, she would look like Renisha McBride.

 

[Zona]

Sure looks to me like she was trying to break in.

He shot through the screen door.

That means the screen door wasn't even open.

Man, there are some stupid racists on this thread.

the screen of the door which he shot through

was knocked out of its frame before he fired the shot

that is a fact in the case

someone on the outside of the home knocked the screen out of the door

Even if that is true, who is to say it was her who did it? Either way, he was really in fear of is life? If so, why did he open the damn door?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the killer walks. It's a fucked up world we live in.

So you know all the facts of the case...You are 100% certain of the man's guilt?
Ok, now let's see how say you if the defendant is your brother or son...
And don't give me any nonsense such as "well they wouldn't be there in the first place".

Right now, I am more looking at the victim like she is my daughter and I say let this guy burn for shooting an unarmed woman in the face on his porch.

Non responsive.
Answer the question.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[

Never talk to the cops, EVER. They work for the prosecution, and are always looking for a collar. He should have just called the police and lawyered up, regardless of whether it was self defense or an accidental discharge.

There are circumstances where it's smart to talk to the cops but this isn't one of those times. He should have called the cops and said there was a dead woman on his porch and then shut up. He should not have admitted he shot her.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

[

Never talk to the cops, EVER. They work for the prosecution, and are always looking for a collar. He should have just called the police and lawyered up, regardless of whether it was self defense or an accidental discharge.

There are circumstances where it's smart to talk to the cops but this isn't one of those times. He should have called the cops and said there was a dead woman on his porch and then shut up. He should not have admitted he shot her.

His first call should have been to a lawyer who in turn would call the police.

He then wouldn’t talk to anyone, and refer anyone asking questions to that lawyer.

Every gun owner who thinks he might be in this situation needs to have the number of an attorney readily available. There are law offices that operate on a 24/7 basis for such emergencies; but to ensure your civil liberties are protected you need to have that attorney/client relationship established as soon as possible.

 

[Zona]

So you know all the facts of the case...You are 100% certain of the man's guilt?
Ok, now let's see how say you if the defendant is your brother or son...
And don't give me any nonsense such as "well they wouldn't be there in the first place".

Right now, I am more looking at the victim like she is my daughter and I say let this guy burn for shooting an unarmed woman in the face on his porch.

Non responsive.
Answer the question.

If he was my brother or family member, I would ask him why he first said it was an "accident" then when that didnt work, why did he change his story to he was in fear of his life. I would ask him how he was in fear of his life and why did he open the door and shoot that little girl in the face.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Right now, I am more looking at the victim like she is my daughter and I say let this guy burn for shooting an unarmed woman in the face on his porch.

Non responsive.
Answer the question.

If he was my brother or family member, I would ask him why he first said it was an "accident" then when that didnt work, why did he change his story to he was in fear of his life. I would ask him how he was in fear of his life and why did he open the door and shoot that little girl in the face.

Evasive response.
The question is would you be so quick to assume the homeowner guilty if he was a relative of yours.
I have no dog in this fight. If the homeowner is guilty of a crime, let him pay the price.
But first, let the process work itself out.

 

[Zona]

Non responsive.
Answer the question.

If he was my brother or family member, I would ask him why he first said it was an "accident" then when that didnt work, why did he change his story to he was in fear of his life. I would ask him how he was in fear of his life and why did he open the door and shoot that little girl in the face.

Evasive response.
The question is would you be so quick to assume the homeowner guilty if he was a relative of yours.
I have no dog in this fight. If the homeowner is guilty of a crime, let him pay the price.
But first, let the process work itself out.

That question is idiotic. Who would think their family member in this case was guilty. Being a family member would make judgement askew.

Again, dumb question. Now back to this idiot who shot a girl in the face by accident...oh sorry, because he was afraid for his life. I cant wait to see him do serious serious time.

 

[thereisnospoon]

If he was my brother or family member, I would ask him why he first said it was an "accident" then when that didnt work, why did he change his story to he was in fear of his life. I would ask him how he was in fear of his life and why did he open the door and shoot that little girl in the face.

Evasive response.
The question is would you be so quick to assume the homeowner guilty if he was a relative of yours.
I have no dog in this fight. If the homeowner is guilty of a crime, let him pay the price.
But first, let the process work itself out.

That question is idiotic. Who would think their family member in this case was guilty. Being a family member would make judgement askew.

Again, dumb question. Now back to this idiot who shot a girl in the face by accident...oh sorry, because he was afraid for his life. I cant wait to see him do serious serious time.

Given the fact that there is another poster with a point of view similar to yours who has the shooter in prison already, the question is 100% legitimate.
Even you have decided he is guilty.
No trial. No evidence. No speedy trial....Just throw the guy into prison, right?
You tell me....Should I not question that?

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Non responsive.
Answer the question.

If he was my brother or family member, I would ask him why he first said it was an "accident" then when that didnt work, why did he change his story to he was in fear of his life. I would ask him how he was in fear of his life and why did he open the door and shoot that little girl in the face.

Evasive response.
The question is would you be so quick to assume the homeowner guilty if he was a relative of yours.
I have no dog in this fight. If the homeowner is guilty of a crime, let him pay the price.
But first, let the process work itself out.

So, we should not have an opinion about this case? How profoundly liberal!

 

[Esmeralda]

The question is would you be so quick to assume the homeowner guilty if he was a relative of yours.

Given who most of my relatives are, yes.

I think the shooting was completely unjusitified and the homeowner was a trigger happy fool who didn't use his head at all and made a hugely stupid choice which resulted in a young, unarmed person losing her life. People who have guns have a responsibility to act with reason and thoughfulness: he didn't and should pay with his life as well: not execution but life in prison.

 

[Politico]

how scared can one be and still open the door?

If you have a 45 pressed against the other side not much at all.

Probably about 75% of the population has smoked pot.

Katzndogs thinks the death of 200 million Americans would be no great loss?

What?

Well that's a whole other topic

 

[The Professor]

I'm not the brightest bulb in the chandelier, but several things bother me about this case. First, some people are saying she was trying to break in but if that were the case why would she keep knocking on the door? Most people who are trying to break into a house at night don't want to wake those inside. Even home invaders don't keep banging on the door; instead they attempt to force it open as quickly as possibly to take those inside by surprise. From what I've read at the link OP provided, there is insufficient evidence to establish the woman was trying to break in (banging/knocking on the door is not the equivalent of breaking and entering). According to Michigan's Castle Doctrine it is not enough for the defendant to believe someone is trying to break in. Instead it must also be proved that the person was actually in the process of breaking and entering (the applicable law is shown below).

Second, if the woman was not trying to break in the Castle Doctrine does not apply and the defendant is left with only the standard self-defense provisions that apply in all states: the person must have a reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury at the time the deadly force is used. I question how anyone could have a reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury if he is shielded by a closed door and is holding a shotgun. I sure as hell wouldn't be afraid in that situation. This guy actually opened the door and then shot through the screen door and I think this will be his undoing.

Pertinent parts of Michigan law as it applies to the Castle Doctrine (highlights are my own):

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2), it is a rebuttable presumption in a civil or criminal case that an individual who uses deadly force or force other than deadly force under section 2 of the self-defense act has an honest and reasonable belief that imminent death of, sexual assault of, or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another individual will occur if both of the following apply:

(a) The individual against whom deadly force or force other than deadly force is used is in the process of breaking and entering a dwelling or business premises or committing home invasion or has broken and entered a dwelling or business premises or committed home invasion and is still present in the dwelling or business premises, or is unlawfully attempting to remove another individual from a dwelling, business premises, or occupied vehicle against his or her will.

(b) The individual using deadly force or force other than deadly force honestly and reasonably believes that the individual is engaging in conduct described in subdivision (a).


Metro-Detroit Criminal Lawyer: Michigan?s ?Castle Doctrine?

In conclusion, I believe there will be a plea deal; however if it goes to trial the man will be convicted.