Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Agreed, castle doctrine, perhaps a little different since the guy shot wasn't inside the house (apparently) but the shooter was.
And why does OP say "no charges brought"? It clearly states he was first charged with 2nd degree murder, then charged with manslaughter. A year later, the state does not object to his motion to drop the charge. [MOD CUT/off topic]
Agreed, castle doctrine, perhaps a little different since the guy shot wasn't inside the house (apparently) but the shooter was.
And why does OP say "no charges brought"? It clearly states he was first charged with 2nd degree murder, then charged with manslaughter. A year later, the state does not object to his motion to drop the charge. [MOD CUT/off topic]
Right. His mistake is that he shot him while he was stil trying to break in instead of waiting for him to come in all the way. I can understand the defendant's reaction under stress but at the same time I understand that the state wanted to charge him with manslaughter ( 2nd murder is completely inappropriate ) because they might not want to send the message that people have the right to shoot and kill without assessing the situation first.
This case has nothing to do with what GZ did in stalking, aggressively pursuing, then suckering that boy into an altercation so GZ could feign helplessness and shoot the boy...all because the boy was black.
GZ-supporting racists hold the inferior position here, and sneaky conniver GZ will likely be convicted for what he did. The incident here was an entirely different set of circumstances.
Marcos Santiago was trying to break into the defendant's house when he was shot dead. This is clean cut self defense. Castle doctrine as in you are breaking into the place that I live in. Not stand your ground as in I am chasing you around the neighborhood.
The problem is that he shot the guy while he was still outside. "Stand your ground" and self defense is only valid when your life or someone else's is in imminent danger. Somebody on the outside of the house while you are on the inside is not "imminent" by any definition. Also, "warning shots" are never legal. At a minimum you can be charged with reckless endangerment because the shot could hit a neighbor or bystander.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrClose
I never said anything.
It was all copied and pasted!
You copy-n-pasted the title of the thread? If so, you copied from a place with bad writers.
Quote:
Black Man Shoots And Kills Unarmed Hispanic Florida Teen, Claims Felt Threatened, No Witnesses – NO CHARGES BROUGHT
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nothing to do with what GZ did. How absurd.
