It's Gauth. Does this even surprise you?
Advertisement

by Viritica » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:03 pm

by Fartsniffage » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:03 pm

by Infected Mushroom » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:03 pm
Viritica wrote:Trotskylvania wrote:Self-defense requires imminence. There must be a clear and present danger to your life. And it must be reasonable. In California, an objective reasonable person standard is employed for self-defense.
When the assailants flee, the imminent danger is over and your right to use deadly force ends. And when you leave your home, the place of safety, and give chase and kill someone, that's murder.
Stop defending murderers. Quit being pro-criminal.
This is Castle Doctrine we're talking about here. They were on his property and he'd been robbed four times before. They'd just got done beating him and who's to say they wouldn't return? It's reasonable to say he would think they'd harm him again the future.
Stop trying to re-victimize this man.

by Fartsniffage » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:04 pm
Viritica wrote:Trotskylvania wrote:Self-defense requires imminence. There must be a clear and present danger to your life. And it must be reasonable. In California, an objective reasonable person standard is employed for self-defense.
When the assailants flee, the imminent danger is over and your right to use deadly force ends. And when you leave your home, the place of safety, and give chase and kill someone, that's murder.
Stop defending murderers. Quit being pro-criminal.
This is Castle Doctrine we're talking about here. They were on his property and he'd been robbed four times before. They'd just got done beating him and who's to say they wouldn't return? It's reasonable to say he would think they'd harm him again the future.
Stop trying to re-victimize this man.

by Gauthier » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:05 pm
Fartsniffage wrote:Viritica wrote:This is Castle Doctrine we're talking about here. They were on his property and he'd been robbed four times before. They'd just got done beating him and who's to say they wouldn't return? It's reasonable to say he would think they'd harm him again the future.
Stop trying to re-victimize this man.
Was the shot woman on his property?

by Tarsonis Survivors » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:06 pm
Trotskylvania wrote:Viritica wrote:They'd just got done beating him. And he'd been robbed four times before. I think it's safe to say he felt threatened.
Self-defense requires imminence. There must be a clear and present danger to your life. And it must be reasonable. In California, an objective reasonable person standard is employed for self-defense.
When the assailants flee, the imminent danger is over and your right to use deadly force ends. And when you leave your home, the place of safety, and give chase and kill someone, that's murder.
Stop defending murderers. Quit being pro-criminal.

by Geilinor » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:06 pm
Fartsniffage wrote:Viritica wrote:This is Castle Doctrine we're talking about here. They were on his property and he'd been robbed four times before. They'd just got done beating him and who's to say they wouldn't return? It's reasonable to say he would think they'd harm him again the future.
Stop trying to re-victimize this man.
Was the shot woman on his property?
Despite his injuries, Greer managed to grab his gun and fire at the suspects, causing them to flee through the garage and into the alley, police said.

by Scomagia » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:07 pm
Geilinor wrote:Fartsniffage wrote:
Was the shot woman on his property?
Her dead body wasn't, but the shot was fired while she was running towards the garage.Despite his injuries, Greer managed to grab his gun and fire at the suspects, causing them to flee through the garage and into the alley, police said.

by Fartsniffage » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:08 pm
Geilinor wrote:Fartsniffage wrote:
Was the shot woman on his property?
Her dead body wasn't, but the shot was fired while she was running towards the garage.Despite his injuries, Greer managed to grab his gun and fire at the suspects, causing them to flee through the garage and into the alley, police said.

by Tarsonis Survivors » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:08 pm
Trotskylvania wrote:Occupied Deutschland wrote:Actually, considering the unlikelihood/absence of premeditation (getting beaten and robbed from likely to result in a good deal of passion, not inviting planning of much of anything) and mens rea beyond 'they were just beating me!', first degree is pretty much out the window.
No. Having the presence of mind to retrieve a pistol, and then give chase when they flee is proof of malice aforethought. The act of leaving the place of safety and giving chase is proof of premeditation.
This not a matter of heat of passion. Heat of passion is an affirmative, impartial defense. It'll bring you down to involuntary manslaughter at best, and it's very difficult to prove, and this man shows none of the signs. Heat of passion means the defendant can at best hazily recollect what actually happened. They're scattered, and usually horrified by what they did. This person in the interview showed himself to be completely lucid during the events, and incriminated himself. He acknowledged her pleas for her life and openly stated that he consciously disregarded them.
This is a textbook case, and the poor devil wasn't smart enough to lawyer up before he shot his mouth off to the media.

by Viritica » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:09 pm
Fartsniffage wrote:Viritica wrote:This is Castle Doctrine we're talking about here. They were on his property and he'd been robbed four times before. They'd just got done beating him and who's to say they wouldn't return? It's reasonable to say he would think they'd harm him again the future.
Stop trying to re-victimize this man.
Was the shot woman on his property?

by Ratateague » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:09 pm

by New Acardia » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:09 pm
Scomagia wrote:New acardia wrote:They beat him .
In fact there should be a law any one who is killed while commenting a violent crime that's your tough luck .
Also the thug bitch would still be alive if she did not break in to Mr. Geer's house and beat him .
Do you get paid a dollar or something every-time you call a woman a bitch?

by New Acardia » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:10 pm

by New Acardia » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:10 pm

by Fartsniffage » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:10 pm

by Gauthier » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:11 pm

by New Acardia » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:12 pm
Fartsniffage wrote:New acardia wrote:If the thug bitch did not break in to Mr. Greer's house.
The thug bitch would not got her thug ass killed in the first plac.
Andrea Miller. That's the name of the dead person.
And you're right, if she hadn't broken into the place then she would probably be alive. But the question is whether Mr. Greer killed her legally. I don't believe that he did.

by Viritica » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:12 pm

by Fartsniffage » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:12 pm

by New Acardia » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:12 pm
Fartsniffage wrote:New acardia wrote:Let's not make this thug bitch in to a victim .
In case people forgot she broke in to a 80 year old man's house and withl the other thug she was with gave him a beating . So the bitch got her thug ass killed .to that I say DSAF .
Andrea Miller is dead. Ton Greer is not. Seems to me like he came out of the altercation better off.
If the thug bitch did not break in to Mr. Greer's house.
The thug bitch would not got her thug ass killed in the first plac.

by Viritica » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:13 pm

by Fartsniffage » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:13 pm
New acardia wrote:Fartsniffage wrote:
Andrea Miller. That's the name of the dead person.
And you're right, if she hadn't broken into the place then she would probably be alive. But the question is whether Mr. Greer killed her legally. I don't believe that he did.
To me she is just a thug bitch . That prayed on the wrong person and got her thug ass taken out .
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: -Astoria-, Abserdia, Alvecia, Amenson, Eahland, Ethel mermania, Grand matrix of Dues ex machina, Incelastan, Southeast Iraq, Stellar Colonies, Thermodolia, Vassenor
Advertisement