Grandpa, 72 years old, held in death of robba

[miditek]

72-year-old shopkeeper held after stabbing to death robber

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... obber.html

An elderly shopkeeper has been arrested on suspicion of attempted murder after a armed raider was killed in a botched robbery and a second left in hospital.

So let's get this one straight- two armed robbers break in on grandpa, and the old codger happens to have a blade handy. Grandpa then makes good on one of the intruders by gutting him, which in turn, kills the thug during the melee. Now grandpa is in jail on suspicion of murder charges.

In a contrasting case, two of my neighbors (one of which is a state police officer) recently stopped two thugs that were breaking into another neighbor's vehicle. Special Agent Richardson drew his service weapon and arrested the two perpetrators, and held them until the city police sent a squad car to transport the two punks to jail.

When the case made it to court, my neighbors were called in as witnesses for the prosecution. The District Attorney indicated that he was tired of seeing the two criminals in the courtroom over and over again. He told Special Agent Richardson to shoot the pair on sight if he saw them breaking into anyone's house again, and that the DA's office would not prosecute. The judge then warned the criminals about TCA 39-11-611 (Castle Doctrine), and how it protects homeowners from prosecution and lawsuits if deadly force is used against an intruder.

He also stated that the "imminent threat of death and or grave bodily injury" is implied if an armed criminal is found to be breaking in to an occupied residence or business, and that the pair were risking their lives if they continued with their current criminal activities.



Tennessee Governor Signs Vital “Castle Doctrine” Legislation!

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Today, Tuesday, May 22, Governor Phil Bredesen (D) signed House Bill 1907, the “Castle Doctrine” self-defense bill, into law.

HB 1907, sponsored by State Representative Randy Rinks (D-71), would allow an individual to use deadly force to protect him or herself wherever they have a legal right to be. The bill also provides civil immunity for those who defend themselves from criminal attack.

We would also like to recognize and thank State Senators Doug Jackson (D-25) and Paul Stanley (R-31) for sponsoring the Senate version of this legislation and State Representative Eric Swafford (R-25) for his support in the House.

Visit the following YouTube channel:

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheArmedCitizen

for more information on how armed citizens can make the difference in a life or death situation.

[Stevie Wonder]

sjdfioasu8734rjbfds[]d\fs[dfsdfm,./,.dfmdsjf32./21./3mkdf

[ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ]

sjdfioasu8734rjbfds[]d\fs[dfsdfm,./,.dfmdsjf32./21./3mkdf

Have you tried blind-characters?

[Stevie Wonder]

sjdfioasu8734rjbfds[]d\fs[dfsdfm,./,.dfmdsjf32./21./3mkdf

Have you tried blind-characters?

kjiaudhfhu4389iokfvxcg[]g=-=;'./sdf;kj213124?<><#1@%^Ugv

[ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ]

Why not play something for us instead?

Kjia hud fioas oxvyx. UGV UGV!

[NeonVomit]

It all revolves around whether he did it in self-defence or not. If the intruder was posing a threat to him at the time, then it was self defence. If he wasn't, and he was incapacitated, then it's not considered self-defence. So, if you manage to incapacitate an intruder on your property, they don't pose a threat to you and if you then kill them, that's murder.

So basically he's been arrested on suspicion of murder, and the self-defence angle is the defence he's going for - the CPS are going to have to prove that he didn't have suitable grounds for committing such an act.

Considering that he's been bailed (to put this in context, people charged with murder are virtually never released on bail) it seems the magistrates' court have pretty much sided with this view on things, and it's highly likely the Crown Court will see things the same way. I'll give it about an 85-90% chance of him being cleared of wrongdoing if he's got even semi-decent legal representation. In fact, upon examination of further evidence (CCTV footage for example) I won't be surprised if the charges are dropped altogether.

We can blame this whole long-way-round process on some archaic legislation that exist in the UK - it's one of the things about the legal system here that are quite counter-intuitive (don't even get me started on property law ) and there's actually no such thing as first- or second- degree murder (yet - new legislation is due to come into force next year, which will mean I'm going to have to re-learn everything to keep up to date. Oh well!)

[miditek]

It all revolves around whether he did it in self-defence or not. If the intruder was posing a threat to him at the time, then it was self defence. If he wasn't, and he was incapacitated, then it's not considered self-defence. So, if you manage to incapacitate an intruder on your property, they don't pose a threat to you and if you then kill them, that's murder.

I believe that the article mentioned both of the perpetrators were armed with handguns. If they were recovered from the scene, I would hope that they could at least be used as evidence that the thugs intended to cause harm to the victim.

So basically he's been arrested on suspicion of murder, and the self-defence angle is the defence he's going for - the CPS are going to have to prove that he didn't have suitable grounds for committing such an act.

Will the prosecution make its case in front of a jury? Or should I rephrase the question, I wonder if the prosecution has sufficient grounds to even take this case to trial?

Considering that he's been bailed (to put this in context, people charged with murder are virtually never released on bail) it seems the magistrates' court have pretty much sided with this view on things, and it's highly likely the Crown Court will see things the same way. I'll give it about an 85-90% chance of him being cleared of wrongdoing if he's got even semi-decent legal representation. In fact, upon examination of further evidence (CCTV footage for example) I won't be surprised if the charges are dropped altogether.

If he has made bail, then that is probably a good sign for him, and hopefully there will be some substantial evidence for the defense in this case.

I have a friend that is a certified (by the TN Commission for Continuing Legal Education)as a capital murder trial specialist that once had to defend a (legally armed) client that had been charged with murder after shooting some psychopath that was coming at him with a tire tool. The defendant told that attacker that he was armed and would fire if he didn't back off, but the 'victim' ignored the warning, and of course got dusted off in fairly short order. This was before the Castle Doctrine Law was passed by the TN General Assembly.

After the defendant was acquitted by a jury, my friend made a press statement that indicated Americans' rights to self-defense are inalienable, and a cornerstone of our freedom. He also thanked the jury for their decision.

We can blame this whole long-way-round process on some archaic legislation that exist in the UK - it's one of the things about the legal system here that are quite counter-intuitive

I see your point. The law that the Castle Doctrine replaced was also one of these strange, obscure laws that had an "obligation to retreat" type of rule that required a homeowner to make every attempt to retreat from the threat before taking action that most would consider to be self-defense to begin with.

(don't even get me started on property law )

Tennessee's law is limited to self-defense, and only in the event that "grave bodily injury or death is imminent", and makes no provisions for the protection of private property. Laws like this vary by state. Texas, for instance, has by far the most expansive interpretation of the Castle Doctrine, which does extend the right to use deadly force to protect one's private property (i.e., from a car thief, etc.) that is outside the home, and even authorizes deadly force if a neighbor's property (i.e., their house is being burglarized) is at risk.

and there's actually no such thing as first- or second- degree murder (yet - new legislation is due to come into force next year, which will mean I'm going to have to re-learn everything to keep up to date. Oh well!)

Over here it's called CPE's (Continuing Professional Education) credits, and attorneys have to have something like 80 CPE hours of additional training every two years to maintain their law license in the state. Doctors and accountants are also under similar regulatory rules by state boards.

[AGAG]

It never ends!

This will never end.

[BBBBBBBBB]

THE WAR NEVER ENDS!!!!!!!!!!!

[NeonVomit]

[miditek]

I think someone forgot their caption.

Here's a stock one that is royalty-free:


"Oy, vey!"

[browneyedgirl]

I downloaded that fellow in case I ever needed him.

[miditek]

Here's one that reminds me a little more of NV than the other one.

[Arnold Layne]

What the hell is a Robba?

Arnold Layne