|
 Originally Posted by Lukie
I'm just the messenger on that one. I don't know anything about the case except for reading a few articles on it.
My understanding is that the crux of the case would rest on whether the physical evidence exposed his claim that he thought the man had a weapon wasn't possible.
 Originally Posted by Lukie
See to me that is manslaughter or murder (of course, I am assuming that a 2 paragraph entry on a website is accurate, and they often aren't) and falls well outside the scope of any reasonable self-defense or even castle doctrine law.
I don't disagree at all. However, the law they are citing there has to do with an interpretation of a law on citizen's arrest that seems tricky.
 Originally Posted by seven-deuce
Objection.
The guy was in the car and driving away. It seems unlikely to me that the thief would turn around and start shooting out the back window of the car while making his escape.
Also the homeowner already called the cops so why not let them do their job?
The owner chased after the man on foot, so the bold isn't necessarily true. As an aside, the "let the cops do their job" argument doesn't apply whenever you believe you're about to be shot at.
To prosecute under Washington State law, they have to be able to prove that the man didn't believe the guy was lifting a gun.
 Originally Posted by daviddem
Article says the guy did not have a weapon, so why in the world would he raise his arm in a mock shooting gesture while driving away? To have a better chance of getting shot?
I don't think the man who was shot would have been thinking about this at the time. Someone who wants to claim that the owner is a bloodthirsty, irresponsible fucker might suggest that he would have shot regardless.
 Originally Posted by seven-deuce
He might not have, it's a plausible theory to suggest that the homeowner made this up to justify his actions and satisfy his own bloodlust. This whole incident clearly shows he isn't responsible enough to own a gun.
I agree with the first sentence and disagree with the second. If the thief did actually appear to be pointing a weapon in the guy's direction as he chased after the car, then there is nothing proven about his lack of responsibility, and there is currently no conclusive proof to the contrary.
|