Self-defense or manslaughter?

[Dave Workman]

Does Akron case show need to re-examine self-defense?

An Akron, Ohio homeowner was arraigned yesterday on a charge of voluntary manslaughter in the Aug. 7 shooting death of a man who had apparently broken into his home, and some readers of the Akron Beacon Journal are suggesting that instead of being prosecuted, he ought to be congratulated.

<broken link removed>

Read More

 

[RicInOR]

Shooting someone who is fleeing is different (and most likely wrong) than shooting someone in the back.

The time it takes to pull the trigger can be long enough for them to spin, thus getting someone in the back.

But, if they are fleeing ..
- 1 Police have a duty to protect, regular citizens do not
- 2 Location, if you are in a city / suburb you have different resources than someone rural
- 3 Do you reasonably believe that if you don't stop them with deadly force that they will harm or kill others?
- 4 Can you make that decision in the split seconds you have?


As I am not a cop, my mindset is to Stop the threat; and that threat stops when they leave. But, I am not going to come off the sights - people can and do shoot behind themselves.



Tough questions in both cases.


Thanks Dave.

 

[Dave Workman]

Shooting someone who is fleeing is different (and most likely wrong) than shooting someone in the back.

The time it takes to pull the trigger can be long enough for them to spin, thus getting someone in the back.

But, if they are fleeing ..
- 1 Police have a duty to protect, regular citizens do not
- 2 Location, if you are in a city / suburb you have different resources than someone rural
- 3 Do you reasonably believe that if you don't stop them with deadly force that they will harm or kill others?
- 4 Can you make that decision in the split seconds you have?

As I am not a cop, my mindset is to Stop the threat; and that threat stops when they leave. But, I am not going to come off the sights - people can and do shoot behind themselves.

Tough questions in both cases.


Thanks Dave.

You're definitely welcome, and thanks for such a reasoned response. It's the kind of intelligent consideration I always hope to elicit with one of these screed burps. You raise good considerations!

If you don't mind, cut and paste this over to Examiner in the Comments section. I think it will greatly add to the conversation over there.

 

[slimmer13]

Police have a duty to protect, regular citizens do not.

It has been established in court that police DO NOT have a duty to protect. Maybe morally but definitely not legally. They have a duty to enforce laws.

 

[Deebow]

Two Perps, one Good guy, they broke into the home. Why wasn't he shooting already?

This would have been the last thing they ever saw:



One story, end of story.

 

[The B]

It has been established in court that police DO NOT have a duty to protect. Maybe morally but definitely not legally. They have a duty to enforce laws.

We can even argue whether they have a "duty" to enforce laws. They have discretion, and there are few laws that specifically require law enforcement to enforce. Domestic violence, DUII.... what else? Certainly your run-of-the-mill violent crimes are all pretty much up to the discretion of the officer.

As to the OP's question - I can very, very easily picture a scene where it's highly appropriate to shoot at a "fleeing" attacker, and without any belief they're trying to run off to do someone else harm. Allowing them to move to a position of cover from which to shoot at me is NOT an option. If someone is in my house and I believe they mean to do me harm, situation depending, I'm probably going to open fire until they're lying on the ground... coming at me, running away from me - irrelevant. If I was meaning to do someone harm, and they stuffed a gun up my nose, I'd back up and find cover from which to reengage the assault as well.

And I'm OK with the possibility that this could be perceived by a grand jury to be "shooting a man in the back." Better to be tried by those 12 than carried by some other 6, as they say.

 

[Heywood]

...If someone is in my house and I believe they mean to do me hard, situation depending, I'm probably going to open fire until they're lying on the ground..

just what situation would make you not in that instance???

 

[shootnscoot]

He chased the guy and finally shot him when he was a couple houses over from his. Not sure that fits the "he was breaking in and I shot him as he was fleeing my front door" defense.

 

[oknow]

We can even argue whether they have a "duty" to enforce laws. They have discretion, and there are few laws that specifically require law enforcement to enforce. Domestic violence, DUII.... what else? Certainly your run-of-the-mill violent crimes are all pretty much up to the discretion of the officer.

You can argue those points if the perp is a cop.

 

[The B]

just what situation would make you not in that instance???

If you're referencing my typo "hard" instead of "harm," then... well... none.

Not so much into getting bubblegum raped.

 

[Stomper]

LOL.... long live the typos!!

 

[decklin]

He chased the guy and finally shot him when he was a couple houses over from his. Not sure that fits the "he was breaking in and I shot him as he was fleeing my front door" defense.

Please provide a link.

 

[U8395279]

just what situation would make you not in that instance???

The circumstances of this case would be one such instance where it would not be wise to shoot.

.

 

[lucky guy]

He chased the guy and finally shot him when he was a couple houses over from his. Not sure that fits the "he was breaking in and I shot him as he was fleeing my front door" defense.

Hard to argue he was in fear of imminent serious injury or death when the perps were running away. Not self-defense. They might have deserved it, but imho he's in big doo-doo. Then a false statement to the officers to cover up an illegal shooting? A lay-down felony in most states. If he thought he was legal why did he lie? Too bad, sitting home minding his own business and now this.

 

[U8395279]

Please provide a link.

Many of the early news reports linked in the beginning of this article do not provide any details about the circumstances of the shooting. But if you go to the later report by the local Fox News station, you will see that the homeowner ran outside of his home and chased after the men, and fired somewhere around 6 to 8 shots ( according to a neighbor ) at them as they fled. This all happened quite some distance from the home.

In this scene in the photo below, you can see where police have placed markers for 4 shell casings that they have found, as they look for more with metal detectors.



The Examiner.com article is poorly written, as it should have made it clear that the scene of the shooting was at a different location. This may well have been done intentionally, in a disingenuous manner to stir up controversy. At the very least, it was a major oversight on their part.

Oregon's self-defense laws pretty much give a homeowner Carte Blanche authority to shoot someone that has entered your home to commit a crime. But that protection from prosecution disappears once that person goes outside your residence. For after all, you can simply stay inside your residence and be safe, and wait for police to arrive, at that point in time.

Once he chased the men outside of his home, the homeowner should have simply dialed 911.

Here is the link to the Fox News story:

http://fox8.com/2015/08/17/man-who-shot-home-invasion-suspect-charged-with-voluntary-manslaughter/

.

 

[U8395279]

Did anyone else get any security alerts when you visited the Examiner.com website?

One of my security programs said it blocked an attempt made to connect to my computer's microphone. And my keyboard locked up while I was connected that website, and immediately cleared up once I closed and left it. Made me wonder if it was try to get through my key logging protection program.

Makes me wonder if the Examiner.com website has been hacked, and malicious software installed on it.

.

 

[lucky guy]

Did anyone else get any security alerts when you visited the Examiner.com website?

One of my security programs said it blocked an attempt made to connect to my computer's microphone. And my keyboard locked up while I was connected that website, and immediately cleared up once I closed and left it. Made me wonder if it was try to get through my key logging protection program.

Makes me wonder if the Examiner.com website has been hacked, and malicious software installed on it.

.

Not me, I'm on a Mac. I've had it happen on the Fox site though, I never link to anything on there anymore.

 

[decklin]

Many of the early news reports linked in the beginning of this article do not provide any details about the circumstances of the shooting. But if you go to the later report by the local Fox News station, you will see that the homeowner ran outside of his home and chased after the men, and fired somewhere around 6 to 8 shots ( according to a neighbor ) at them as they fled. This all happened quite some distance from the home.

In this scene in the photo below, you can see where police have placed markers for 4 shell casings that they have found, as they look for more with metal detectors.

View attachment 252835

The Examiner.com article is poorly written, as it should have made it clear that the scene of the shooting was at a different location. This may well have been done intentionally, in a disingenuous manner to stir up controversy. At the very least, it was a major oversight on their part.

Oregon's self-defense laws pretty much give a homeowner Carte Blanche authority to shoot someone that has entered your home to commit a crime. But that protection from prosecution disappears once that person goes outside your residence. For after all, you can simply stay inside your residence and be safe, and wait for police to arrive, at that point in time.

Once he chased the men outside of his home, the homeowner should have simply dialed 911.

Here is the link to the Fox News story:

http://fox8.com/2015/08/17/man-who-shot-home-invasion-suspect-charged-with-voluntary-manslaughter/

.

The reason I asked for him to provide a link is because, as you've now also said, the shooting happened at a separate location.
Yet I've read multiple articles that say the shooting happened on the property and the man died at a separate location.
<broken link removed>

 

[decklin]

Did anyone else get any security alerts when you visited the Examiner.com website?

One of my security programs said it blocked an attempt made to connect to my computer's microphone. And my keyboard locked up while I was connected that website, and immediately cleared up once I closed and left it. Made me wonder if it was try to get through my key logging protection program.

Makes me wonder if the Examiner.com website has been hacked, and malicious software installed on it.

.

I'm not a fan of the examiner. I usually don't make it passed the first paragraph as I tend to just close the window after the third or fourth ad has interrupted my reading.

 

[Stomper]

I frakin' HATE the Examiner website and all their pop-ups (I got your "please rotate your device" RIGHT HERE, buddy!!) and only go there to read Dave Workman's articles so he can at least get a "hit" count, and hopefully get paid for it.