Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Stuart G

(38,419 posts)
Fri May 31, 2013, 08:32 AM May 2013

With Stand Your Ground Laws Still Standing, Two Alabama Shooters Escape Liability

Think Progress:

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/05/30/2075961/with-stand-your-ground-laws-still-standing-two-alabama-shooters-escape-liability/

By Nicole Flatow on May 30, 2013 at 10:30 am

Earlier this month, a 21-year-old African American approached the home of his step-father’s ex-girlfriend in Jefferson County, Alabama, and ended up dead. The woman who lived in the home said she shot him out of fear for her safety, and as a result, no charges will be filed against her under Alabama’s Stand Your Ground law — the same law that gained notoriety after the tragic killing of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin.

The woman, whose name was not released, said she was out walking her dog when she saw a man run by her home and went inside to get a gun. When she came back out, a man she believed to be the same person was walking down her driveway. She told him to stop, and that she had a gun. But he kept approaching. She shot and he died.

Unfortunately, little else is known about the case, and likely never will be now that the inquiry has ended with the state’s Stand Your Ground law. The woman said she could not identify the man and feared he was planning to attack her. She said she had particular fear because her boyfriend had been recently robbed, according to Jefferson County District Attorney Brandon Falls. The man, Demetrius Antuan Thompson, had no criminal record. He had no known motive for an attack or break-in.

Under Alabama’s Stand Your Ground law, the woman had no duty to retreat, and it didn’t matter that she voluntarily came outside with a gun. Even if she only feared second-degree assault (intent and execution of serious physical injury), she was authorized to use deadly force. ”This is a tragic situation, but legally she was justified,” Falls told AL.com.

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
With Stand Your Ground Laws Still Standing, Two Alabama Shooters Escape Liability (Original Post) Stuart G May 2013 OP
This is the NRA version meanit May 2013 #1
This is strange. JimDandy May 2013 #2
For Memorial Day, I visited a very old rural family cemetery on private land... hlthe2b May 2013 #3
This isn't a "Stand Your Ground" case. Skeeter Barnes May 2013 #4
Not necessarily required, but ... jade3000 May 2013 #5
What is "not required"? Skeeter Barnes May 2013 #6
I think she wanted to kill him cprise May 2013 #7
Tell it to the DA Skeeter Barnes May 2013 #9
Your article cites both SYG and Castle law. n/t cprise May 2013 #8
I specifically quoted law enforcement stating the DA's postion that this was castle doctrine, Skeeter Barnes May 2013 #10
Please explain how castle law is invoked cprise Jun 2013 #11
From your own link Skeeter Barnes Jun 2013 #12

meanit

(455 posts)
1. This is the NRA version
Fri May 31, 2013, 08:44 AM
May 2013

of the "good ole days", when you just shot a stranger who was on your land.
It's fucking legalized murder.

JimDandy

(7,318 posts)
2. This is strange.
Fri May 31, 2013, 09:13 AM
May 2013

How likely is it there was something going on other than what she said? She shot her ex-boyfriends son. And she said it was a strange man?

That said, she was on her property, which makes for a different case than Travon Martin's. Hope the police did the type of due dilligence in this case that they did the second time around with Martin's case.

hlthe2b

(102,228 posts)
3. For Memorial Day, I visited a very old rural family cemetery on private land...
Fri May 31, 2013, 09:22 AM
May 2013

We knocked on the door of the property owners to let them know we were there, but given no one was home, went ahead up the hill into the small cemetery. My understanding is that those who purchase property have a legal requirement to allow for descendents to access the cemetery, but had this been in those states with these barbaric laws, I know I and my two female cousins with me could easily have been killed.

Fortunately, in this rural part of northern MO, people still welcome strangers before automatically SHOOTING them.

Must end with an obligatory F>>K the NRA and those who enable this barbarism.

Skeeter Barnes

(994 posts)
4. This isn't a "Stand Your Ground" case.
Fri May 31, 2013, 10:00 AM
May 2013

Inaccurate reporting by Thinkprogress.

"Relying on the "Castle Law" this was ruled justifiable by the district attorney's office,'' said Chief Deputy Randy Christian. "We don't disagree with that. I wished we knew what his intent was and why he didn't stop, but those are questions that will go unanswered."


http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2013/05/stand_your_ground_jeffco_woman.html

Should a person be required to flee their own property?

jade3000

(238 posts)
5. Not necessarily required, but ...
Fri May 31, 2013, 11:34 AM
May 2013

The fact that she knew the person and is related to an Ex makes this case very suspect and probably should've gone to trial.

Skeeter Barnes

(994 posts)
6. What is "not required"?
Fri May 31, 2013, 11:46 AM
May 2013

Gone to trial for what? Defending herself on her own property? She is allowed to do that.


cprise

(8,445 posts)
7. I think she wanted to kill him
Fri May 31, 2013, 06:04 PM
May 2013

Otherwise she could have stayed inside the house, stuck her head out the window and say she'll call the police if he doesn't leave. She could have fired a warning shot... any number of things. She could have shot him *if* he tried to force his way into the house. Any number of things could have been done to mitigate the perceived threat and/or cause the assailant to make the aggression clear and leave some mark.

Most castle laws are based on unlawful presence in a person's dwelling, not open land. But according to this ruling, that young man's right to life was hanging by a thread the moment he set foot on her property, and its her word that is automatically taken as the true description of events.

That is not reasonable and is something that endangers us all.

Skeeter Barnes

(994 posts)
10. I specifically quoted law enforcement stating the DA's postion that this was castle doctrine,
Fri May 31, 2013, 07:01 PM
May 2013

not stand your ground. You are aware that the DA's office and the blogger who posted the story are different people, right?

BTW, firing warning shots is a horrible idea. Please stop presenting that as a smart tactic.

cprise

(8,445 posts)
11. Please explain how castle law is invoked
Sat Jun 1, 2013, 02:03 AM
Jun 2013

when a person *exits* their home *toward* a supposed assailant. Normally it isn't. Stand Your Ground is used to extend castle law to justify attacks outside the home.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine#Conditions_of_use

Skeeter Barnes

(994 posts)
12. From your own link
Sat Jun 1, 2013, 01:40 PM
Jun 2013
A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal doctrine that designates a person's abode (or, in some states, any legally-occupied place [e.g., a vehicle or workplace]


Each state differs in the way it incorporates the castle doctrine into its laws, what premises are covered (abode only, or other places too), what degree of retreat or non-deadly resistance is required before deadly force can be used, etc.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine#Conditions_of_use

The article I read said she warned the man she was armed and ordered him to stop but he didn't. Maybe you read a different article?

Anyway, that's about it for me on this. Have a great weekend.






Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»With Stand Your Ground La...