Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Get On Board
Enter your email address below to receive updates each time we publish new content.
Browse Archives
Please Support our Efforts
Search the Site
Recent Posts
- Kiosks return in wake of Veteran complaints about online travel claim process
- Sunday FGS
- Boomer’s Sunday
- Donald Trump requests military protection
- Stupid people of the week
- NG chopper crew grounded when their helicopter created wind
- Walz: No more electoral college
- Daily FGS
- Weekend Open Thread
- The drownings of 2 Navy SEALs were preventable, military investigation finds
Recent Comments
- Anonymous on Kiosks return in wake of Veteran complaints about online travel claim process
- Odie on Kiosks return in wake of Veteran complaints about online travel claim process
- rgr769 on Donald Trump requests military protection
- Odie on Kiosks return in wake of Veteran complaints about online travel claim process
- ChipNASA on Walz: No more electoral college
- Jimbojszz on Donald Trump requests military protection
- Jimbojszz on Kiosks return in wake of Veteran complaints about online travel claim process
- LC on Donald Trump requests military protection
- Skippy on Weekend Open Thread
- ChipNASA on Retired Army logistics officer compares government’s responses to Katrina and Helene
- AZtoVA on Kiosks return in wake of Veteran complaints about online travel claim process
- AZtoVA on Kiosks return in wake of Veteran complaints about online travel claim process
- Odie on Boomer’s Sunday
- Odie on Donald Trump requests military protection
- Odie on Donald Trump requests military protection
How do you get charged with four counts of attempted murder when you shot at two guys?
Of course, none of us know the full details and further, I am not a lawyer. But, from what I studied in my intro to business law class, in most states civillians can only use deadly force in defense of life not property. The reasoning is usually because the property owner could harm innocent bystanders. Four counts seems strange since he only fired two shots. But I have to say that shooting at people stealing property (which was eventually returned) deems to be an over reatction. The self defense argument dosen’t hold much water since the property owner put himself in line to be run over. Had he stayed in the house and called 911 it is likely we would not be having this thread.
http://legalselfdefense.blogspot.com/2008/08/colorado.html
Colorado Self Defense Law.
No duty to retreat, may use deadly force to protect self. I guess he wasn’t viewed as defending himself. I am more peeved that the thieves themselves were not charged with anything.
Dead men tell no tales…
It wasn’t the greatest report ever; it rubs me the wrong way when evening newscasters insert their own not-too-subtle angle on things and their little snarky comments at segments’ ends. I agree with the general sentiment (right of self-defense) but I definitely think they presented fewer facts than they had access to.
in a sane world, he’d have gotten a certificate of appreciation from the City Council, and a few free lessons at the police range to make sure the next crooks he shot at died.
not only that, but the illegals would have been deported the first time the cops ran into them, not given plea bargains.
this is BS, plain and simple.
Sounds like a case for the NRA legal team. I hope they are all over this one!
God I love Arizona!! ARS 13-403. Justification; use of physical force The use of physical force upon another person which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal under any of the following circumstances: 1. A parent or guardian and a teacher or other person entrusted with the care and supervision of a minor or incompetent person may use reasonable and appropriate physical force upon the minor or incompetent person when and to the extent reasonably necessary and appropriate to maintain discipline. 2. A superintendent or other entrusted official of a jail, prison or correctional institution may use physical force for the preservation of peace, to maintain order or discipline, or to prevent the commission of any felony or misdemeanor. 3. A person responsible for the maintenance of order in a place where others are assembled or on a common motor carrier of passengers, or a person acting under his direction, may use physical force if and to the extent that a reasonable person would believe it necessary to maintain order, but such person may use deadly physical force only if reasonably necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury. 4. A person acting under a reasonable belief that another person is about to commit suicide or to inflict serious physical injury upon himself may use physical force upon that person to the extent reasonably necessary to thwart the result. 5. A duly licensed physician or a registered nurse or a person acting under his direction, or any other person who renders emergency care at the scene of an emergency occurrence, may use reasonable physical force for the purpose of administering a recognized and lawful form of treatment which is reasonably adapted to promoting the physical or mental health of the patient if: (a) The treatment is administered with the consent of the patient or, if the patient is a minor or an incompetent person, with the consent of his parent, guardian or other person entrusted with his care and supervision except as otherwise provided by law; or (b) The treatment is administered in an emergency when the… Read more »
Arizona’s ‘Castle Laws’ are explicit in that the burden to disprove justification is more important than the burden to prove justification. I don’t have to prove I was right, you have to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that I was wrong. More of the same; ARS 13-418. Justification; use of force in defense of residential structure or occupied vehicles; definitions A. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a person is justified in threatening to use or using physical force or deadly physical force against another person if the person reasonably believes himself or another person to be in imminent peril of death or serious physical injury and the person against whom the physical force or deadly physical force is threatened or used was in the process of unlawfully or forcefully entering, or had unlawfully or forcefully entered, a residential structure or occupied vehicle, or had removed or was attempting to remove another person against the other person’s will from the residential structure or occupied vehicle. B. A person has no duty to retreat before threatening or using physical force or deadly physical force pursuant to this section. C. For the purposes of this section: 1. “Residential structure” has the same meaning prescribed in section 13-1501. 2. “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, that is designed to transport persons or property. ARS 13-419. Presumption; exceptions; definitions A. A person is presumed to be acting reasonably for the purposes of sections 13-404 through 13-408 and section 13-418 if the person is acting against another person who unlawfully or forcefully enters or entered the person’s residential structure or occupied vehicle, except that the presumption does not apply if: 1. The person against whom physical force or deadly physical force was used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the residential structure or occupied vehicle, including an owner, lessee, invitee or titleholder, and an order of protection or injunction against harassment has not been filed against that person. 2. The person against whom the physical force or deadly physical force was used is the… Read more »
Personally I think that the DA is being a dick, but here are some “clarifications” that the Wheat Ridge, CO police department put out.
http://www.ci.wheatridge.co.us/Archive.aspx?AMID=64
The police had a great response time on this no wonder he did what he did. I have a feeling that this isn’t an uncommon experience in that area. I think that it is ridiculous that the DA didn’t charge either of the dipshits in the theft, so that they can be held in jail untill thier exact immigration status can be determined.
I would love it if the judge just looked at it and said are you shitting me? Reall? Are you wasting my time with this?
I figured. The important thing here is, as always, don’t lie to the cops, particularly when you’re the victim. Most reasonable people would probably think to mention that they fired a couple shots at the guys.
Nonetheless, it took 33 goddamn minutes just for the cop to be dispatched after a caller reported an auto theft that had just occurred?? In Wheat Ridge, pop. 31,000?? What a shock that he “didn’t find the trailer in the area.” I’d be taking the law in my hands too with that kind of response time.
The fact that the thief was shot in the face and not the back means nothing, apparently.
First this has to pass muster with a grand jury, then the defendent has the right to ask for a jury trial of his peers. Then the DA can prosecute all he wants but “Jury Nullification” is a real possbility here.
Ok. At best the news report is pretty vague and doesn’t really shed much light on the facts surrounding the actual shooting. Sure we know two guys stole a trailer from an old man, but where were they? Where was he? SPECIFICALLY? What were the actual circumstances at the moment he actually opened fire.
I think the biggest issue here is whether he was shooting at them as they “sped away” or as they sped towards him.
If he was standing in the street and they were speeding directly at him then, yes, I think it would be justified.
However, if he was shooting at them as they were leaving the scene (and they were moving away from him) then he was no longer in any danger and he was wrong to open fire.
The distinction between the two is very important. In reality the legal test is going to be whether the imminent danger was ongoing (speeding at him) or had passed (speeding away from him) when he opened fire.
Of course this is all speculation on everyones part (myself included) without fully knowing every fact.
And, before anyone says ‘he shot the guy in the face, so they must have been coming at him,’ think it through. It is very possible to shoot someone in the face if they are turned sideways, or even turned facing you, in a vehicle that is moving away from you. I’d really like to see where the bullets impacted the vehicle the thieves were in. That would shed a lot of light on this.
Any readers here from that area that can get a copy of the police report? I’d be happy to send you the money to cover the cost of it. (Although most cities won’t release a report while a court case is ongoing.)
V5
Addendum:
Read the PDF file that “JustPlainJason” links in comment #10. It’s pretty clear the guy fired two shots as the thieves were moving away from him… or at least laterally to him… as they were escaping. I’d say the “imminent danger” test has failed. He was not in any true danger.
There are other factors as well; like the guy not reporting and then later lying about shooting at the thieves.
As unpopular as my opinion might be on this, I think it was a completely unjustified shooting and he should be prosecuted.
The flip side of that coin is that I think they’re going overboard with the charges, and they damn sure better charge and prosecute the thieves as well.
Asshattery in this country has no bounds; enough is enough
If the man lied about the encounter, or the shooting, then there is something wrong. The worst thing you can possibly do in a situation like this is lie to the authorities; they will absolutely throw the book at you, if you do.
Just fucking wonderful. Two illegal alien felons/thugs with lengthy rap sheets get off scott free while a home owner defending himself and his property gets shafted. Who’s prosecuting the case? Eric Holder?
V5,
I could care less whether the man felt his life was in danger or not. He did the right thing, and if more people would simply kill the bastards then crime would drop way off.
These two guys were illegals. As far as I am concerned, they had NO rights and should be dead.
AW1 Tim,
No one has proven they were illegal alliens. It’s been suggested, but not verified. Even if they were illegal aliens they do, in fact, have rights.
We are a society of laws. Without them it’d be pure anarchy.
In this particular case I have to disagree with you. The man morally and legally DID NOT do the right thing. Furthermore, how would this have played out if he had missed the truck and struck an innocent bystander with a bullet?
We have laws for a reason. If we don’t follow the laws then we’re no better than the two thieves he was shooting at.
V5
V5:
If the second round had passed through the wall of a neighbor’s house and hit a sleeping child would you feel the same way?
HM2,
With the caveat that this whole news piece and discussion is based on not knowing all the facts yet.
Yes.
I stand by my opinion that he WAS WRONG to open fire under the circumstances as they’ve been presented. Even more so if he had struck an innocent bystander or a sleeping child.
V5
Addendum;
I’d say that any firearms instructor (NRA or otherwise) would agree with me too. In a shoot-no shoot scenario this was DEFINITELY a NO SHOOT situation. Not only were there no immediate threats to his personal body, but the unknown factors of the bullet going down range was to risky in a suburban neighborhood.
Again, with the caveat of this being based on what we know so far.
Regardless of whether or not anyone feels that the homeowner is in the right or wrong, the fact remains that two criminals have admitted to yet another crime and are not being prosecuted.
Pure horseshit.
ROS,
I do agree with that assessment. Time will tell if charges are eventually filed on the thieves. Personally I’d hope that the local PD and prosecutor see fit to file.
V5
I have to say, given the circumstances, that I would not have chosen to shoot in this case, and it’s much better to remain mum than lie to the PoPo. However, I’d love to see a DA prove premeditation on the homeowner’s part for a charge of attempted 1st degree murder. The most I think they should have charged him with is assault with a deadly weapon.
The latest update to the Police web site states both theives have been arrested and charged. The earlier lack of charges was due to the fact the Auto Theft Task Force had decided not to charge them in connection with another investigation.
Bubblehead,
Thanks for the update on the arrest and charges.
Personally I think as you do on the charges. I think eventually we’ll see the charges reduced (if it gets past Grand Jury) with a lesser charge plead to, and probably leniency from the court. Considering the mans age and the events surrounding the shooting I doubt any judge will throw the book at him. Same with a jury.
V5
I’ve always believed I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6. That said, he probably had an “irresistable impulse” to defend his property.
This sounds more like England than the US of A. Of course the real bad guys weren’t even charged. That would smack of racism.
V5,
I denounce your argument in the strongest possible terms. The idea that we are a nation of laws is horse shit and has been so since the day that this current president was sworn into office, he and his administration have turned their backs to our laws.
We have tens of thousands of laws upon our books, yet they are selectively enforced in order to support political gain, in almost every instance for leftists and their enablers. Police departments have been, in many many cases neutered by the ACLU and leftist lawyers, using the courts to gain what they know they could not get at the ballot box.
Better the citizens shoots dead the criminal than allow this mockery of a legal system to continue. As it stands, our courts and justice are routinely sold to the highest bidder, and true justice is unavailable to those without significant income.
Let the citizens clean up their own streets. Turn the city and county landfills into mass graves of gang members, and criminals of all stripes.
The people should start setting up their own courts and meeting out their own justice because what we have right now is certainly not working on their behalf.
And I agree with 1stAirCav69: better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
AW1 Tim,
First paragraph: I have no problem with you disagreeing with me. However, while I am definitely NOT a supporter of President Obama, he is not the only president to do that. Republican and Democrat presidents alike (as well as senators and congressmen and state and local reps from both sides of the aisle) have that problem. Blaming President Obama for all the problems is, in my opinion, quite asinine.
Second Paragraph: I mostly agree with you here, but it’s really starting to get off topic. Getting back on topic I think the man was legally wrong to open fire when he did.
Paragraphs Three, Four, and Five: I completely disagree with and I’m thinking to myself: “WOW! That’s just a whole lot of hate there.”
Last sentence: I do agree with you and 1AirCav69 that it’s better to judged by twelve rather than carried by six. However, as both a former cop and a soldier who has served my country during multiple wars I ONLY agree with that statement if and when it is necessary to do so to protect my life or the lives of others.
In other words; If I’m going to shoot someone I’m making sure they die. But I’m only going to shoot them IF the situation warrants it. Two guys fleeing the scene of a trailer theft DEFINITELY DOES NOT warrant the use of deadly force. There was no imminent threat of danger to the man, and legally that’s the litmus test in this case.
V5
V5:
It seems like AW Tim, like several regulars here, suffers from Obama Derrangement Syndrome. I agree with your assessment of much of the situation. I don’t see the post I thought I was responding to when I posed my question about by standers. My appologies.
Doc
HM2,
After reading and rereading your comment (in the middle somewhere) I was convinced that was the case, but went ahead and answered to clarify my position just to be sure.
Thanks 🙂
V5
Been lurking and I’m going to side with V5 on this one, people.
I agree with V5 to a point too. However, the perps should have already been charged, now they will be only because of the uproar. I think the guy screwed up. I also agree with Dr Chiroux though, I anticipate jury nullification in this one.
TSO,
There was an update in the comments (#26) and on the Police Department website. The thieves have been charged. Apparently they weren’t charged immediately because of another on-going investigation by some sort of auto theft task force. As of posting this comment I haven’t gone back and read the PD website yet. So I’m not 100% sure what the details are.
V5
TSO said I anticipate jury nullification in this one.
I respect nullification! Nullification amounts to a last ditch effort against tyranny.
But if the available facts are accurate this fellow had better NOT get nullification. I can envision a number of scenarios where he might get let off, but I do hope this will not be a nullification test case.
If the facts were different I would have no trouble with acquitting this guy. BUt if the facts as we know them now are true, he needs to some jail time. I don’t think the rest of his life but a few months. I’m not as concerned about him as I am about others in the community.
You’re absolutely right, Doc–82 year old guys who are getting their shit jacked and have to dodge the thieves DESERVE to go to jail.
Frankly, if the cops can’t bother to show up until 30+ minutes after the 911 call went in, the yeast-sucking fuckers don’t DESERVE to know what happened.
And I say that as a former resident of Lakewood who had to deal with them and the Wheatridge PD.
NHSparky, It’s not a matter of him going to jail for having his “shit jacked,” and he certainly didn’t dodge the thieves. He opened fire on two people, regardless of what they were doing, without concern or regard for anyone else in his community. His shooting does not pass the litmus test for a good/legal shooting. He deserves to be punished for breaking the law, just as the thieves deserve to be punished for what they did. Do I think he should go to jail for attempted murder? Of course not. But I do not believe he should just get a free pass. As to the reason Wheatridge PD was so slow in responding. No one here knows why it took so long. A city of what? 31,000? So probably ten to twelve officers on duty at any given time. Who knows maybe they had a fatal traffic crash and a bank robbery at the same time. People don’t realize that dispatchers and supervisors have to prioritize their manpower based on the calls coming in at the time. Apparently the man didn’t tell the dispatcher that he had fired shots, or that he was in any kind of danger. Just that his trailer was being jacked. That’s a lot lower priority than say a missing child, or a fatal car crash, or a bank robbery. Sorry to say, but that’s just the way it is. It’s worthless to accuse the PD (or anyone) of something when you don’t know the actual facts in the case. Maybe you’ve had a bad experience or two with them, your disdain is obvious. However, none of us where riding with the patrol dogs or in dispatch that night. None of us know if they were over-taxed manpower-wise or not. If they were then it’s a rough job having to be the one that prioritizes the calls. Now if they were all loafing at the local 7-11 then, of course, they were wrong and something should be done about that as well. But, again, none of us were there to actually witness the shooting or… Read more »
A few years ago I moved from an area where bystanders shootings were common. Several times a week the news ran stories about children shot in their beds because of wild rounds. While I am not saying that this is the same situation. I am, however, saying that this 82 year old man discharged a weapon in a populated area and then lied about it. Yes, he should be held accountable. Should he go to jail for the rest of his life? Of course not. But I am less concerned about this guy than I am about the rest of the community. If you let one person off for an illegal shooting what about the next one and the one after that?
In regards to the police response time: A few weeks ago I stopped by the VFW. A strange vehicle was outside so after the bartender and patrons inside started getting worried I decided to check them out. I figured they were broken down or waiting for someone. Long story short, a big guy got out of the passenger side as I stepped outside, and there was a bunch of screaming from a female in the driver seat. So I grabbed some protection from my truck just in case. The guy took off in another car as I finally approached the vehicle. The girl was pregnant, her boyfriend and her had gotten into an argument, he punched her in the face and refused to get out when she stopped in the VFW parking lot. When his ride finally showed he spit on her and threatened to kill both her and the baby. She called the police at 1830, I was out there waiting with her sweating my ass off in ACUs. I called the non-emergency number at 1855 and was told they’d dispatch someone soon. At 1915 I called again and got the same response. Finally, around 1925 I flagged down a State Trooper, explained the situation and he called Baton Rouge City over the radio before leaving for the accident he was dispatched to. Five minutes later a cop finally showed up. So, it took an hour for police to respond to a scared pregnant woman who had just been assaulted and was worried her boyfriend or his friends would come back to kill her. The boyfriend was a violent felon who had just served a multi-year sentence and had made it clear that he wasn’t going back to jail without ensuring he made it worth his while. All the while, I’m out there in uniform wondering if the boyfriend is going to show back up before the police and involve me in the situation. I realize that maybe to the police this was not an immediate response situation; the boyfriend had left and the girl was not in need… Read more »
I have to say that the above situation is kind of like one of those apples to oranges situations. First, there may be a number of reasons for the bad response time. It could be that the police department is understaffed. There was an article on the the effects of the current depression on miniciple budgets. It could also be that dispatch did not understand the situation . In any event, it warrents a complaint and more exploration.
BZ for sticking around to make sure things were okay.
-Doc
Can I just kill my fucking self now? Two illegal aliens steal a trailer and the owner tries to stop them and he is in trouble? Hey, hows that hopey changey thing workin out for ya?
JonP,
You might want to read all of the comments. More facts have come out about the entire event.
V5
V5: All I watched was the video news-report. Ok, its good that they were arrested. I still think that the guy was justified on letting off a few rounds. If you wander onto someones property and try and steal shit then you get whats coming. also, those assclowns need to be deported but we all know that the government loves illegals so don’t hold your hand on your ass waiting for that. Look for the prosecutor to offer amnesty and drop all charges in return for them testifying against that poor LEGAL citizens a la Ramos.
I got code 1201 too, just simple return, I use online taxes and efiled on Jan 27, spoke to rep on this the first part of march who said my file was pulled, she didnt know why but then it was released, says everything looked fine and that I should get refund in about 3 weeks, still havent seen anything and mine still says delay in processing code 1201. I was on hold with irs for half hour.