I doubt it. Based on the circumstances, that he was in her home wsa secondary. Initiating an assualt by kicking down the door and having a weapon would have justified the shooting even if it had happened in a public place.

Now if he was in there, with no weapon, thinking it was abandoned and trying to steal. And then shot in the back,, the case might be different. WE still dont have the death penalty for thieves.

how would he be guilty of murder? is there a death not mentioned in the op?


I guess I will see more detail later, because the op didnt even state that he was 'in' her home at all as only one busted down a door with a weapon and assaulted her. He could have just been there (a driver, thief). In which case murder, the most serious offense there is, wouldnt be justified.

When you commit any felony and someone dies, even by accident, in the commission of that felony, you are responsible for their death.

People sue because they are counting on the fact that police departments and cities/counties would rather pay out a settlement than go to court. Of course, they would lose in court, but that's not the point.

That's right.

I noticed some of the comments before I read the article. So at first I thought ya'll were being bloodthirsty, and that Dragonness was the only person responding with compassion. Then I read the article:



I mean...wow. He had a chance to rob the place and get out, if that's what he was after. He had just kicked the door down and came at her with a knife.

Shooting him was absolutely the right thing to do. The situations in which lethal force is truly justified (imo) are very rare. This is definitely one of them.




I'm guessing that varies by the state.

I think thats only the case if the death is accidental. If we have a death declared 'justified' than how can one tag a murder onto it as well. THat makes no legal sense.

No, it's not just accidental. If you and I rob a grocery store and you get shot by the store owner, I'm gonna get charged with murder.

If you and I burglarize a house and you fall out the second story window and die, I get charged with murder.

If you I rob a bank and our getaway car crashes into someone and kills them, you and I are both getting charged with murder.

Accident or otherwise, the suspect/s get charged with murder because they CREATED the situation that caused someone's death.

This is the law in most states.

the difference in these situations is that I dont think any law would rule those deaths 'justified'

seems the ruling of a 'justified' death/shooting, rules out the chance of a murder conviction ,,,at least I think thats how most jurors would see it,,


for me, and probably most laymen(including the ones who set casey free) for someone to be guilty of murder there has to be a 'murder victim'

someone whose death was ruled justified, can hardly also be considered a murder victim,,,,


Im not saying the law doesnt allow it, many innocent people go to jail and many go for being accomplices to crimes,,etc,,,

but Im saying, as a juror, I would not give someone the maximum charge for something they really had no control over,,,,

He has been charged with murder.

His act, (breaking in with him) resulted in the man's death.
Justified or not.

The woman was justified in killing him so she and she alone is free from being charged with murder. She alone was justified.

The partner in crime takes responsibility for the death because he participated in the crime of home invasion and attempted murder or rape or whatever they were attempting. The partner in crime is not justified.

They're not innocent. The law recognizes the fact that when you CHOOSE to commit a felony you must bear the responsibility for anything that happens during that felony. Even if you didn't mean for it to happen.

I understand that you don't agree with it. And, I'm not going to argue about it. You asked how it was possible to be charged with murder in this case and I told you.

RIGHT

msharmony.... HE IS NOT INNOCENT. DUH. THEY ARE CRIMINALS.

I'm just glad that in a crazy backwards world anymore, common sense prevailed on this one and she isn't getting into any trouble for what she did. Often times in cases like this these days, the person defending themselves can get into trouble. Good to know some people still get how things ought to be.

I don't even think I'd have called 911 really, though I can understand why she did with how messed up things are. I'd have just done what had to be done, and that'd be that.

But in any case, good on her for protecting herself, and on the state for backing her up to this point. This is a prime example of why guns are neccessary. If she didn't have one, her and her son may not be alive now for all we know.

I hope she yelled "SAY HELLO TO MY LITTLE FWIND" right when she pulled the trigger.That would've been so cool.

They said she had barricaded the door with a couch and it took him 20 minutes to get through. He was most definitely going after her, and it wasn't just a grab the drugs and run.

I give her credit.

i'm sure when someone is in this situation they wouldn't want their name in the Obituaries,she did the right thing.

no, I got it, I sometimes forget man made justice isnt always fair or logical

he is innocent of taking a life

and he is innocent of CAUSING a life to be taken as he had no control over what the other person CHOSE to do which lead to their death,,,

Does the phrase guilt by association mean anything to you?

He was associated with a situation that led to the death of his partner. I don't feel sorry for him at all.

if you have read ANY of my postings over the years, you would know I absolutely dont agree with the 'by association' mindset....

you have either done it or you havent, I Dont believe people should be accountable for what someone else did,,,