• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Use of a toy gun results in murder charges.

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
This happened a few blocks from me. My real estate agent manages the property where this happened.

Some guys invade a home wielding a toy gun. Resident shoots. One perp dies. His partners in crime are now charged with murder in his death. The homeowner will not be charged. Oh, the stupidity!

http://www.whiotv.com/news/news/crime-law/fairborn-police-investigate-shooting-on-victoria-a/nT8pZ/

FUQ:
One man was killed and another shot in the leg when they, along with three others, allegedly participated in a home invasion Monday evening where the residents fought back.
Police said Tuesday that it is still a bit unclear what prompted the five individuals, ages 19 to 23, to force their way into the Victoria Avenue home while brandishing a fake plastic gun.
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
5 people do a home invasion, use a toy pistol?
What part of this did they think was a good idea?? :eek:
Glad the residents weren't hurt badly.

Two Wright State University students ... were home when the intruders entered.
[One] 21, reportedly struggled with the men and was ordered to the floor. He called out for his roommate ... who told police that he grabbed a gun and fired at the men.

I don't understand where they got the RAS for this:
Police executed a search warrant at the home Tuesday and located a small amount of drugs.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
The PC (not RAS) for the search warrant was that the house was a crime scene. The small amount of drugs found was a single marijuana cigarette. Why the newspaper thought this fact deserved a single sentence is beyond me.
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
I would be so toast. I'm pretty damn sure I can find some full strength Motrin around here that I've long lost the prescription to.
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
eye95 said:
The PC (not RAS) for the search warrant was that the house was a crime scene.
It sounded like the invasion happened in one area, the living room for example, and since the crime was that the 5 invaders invaded, what proof of that could be found anywhere else in the house? There's the broken door, here are the injuries inflicted on the occupants, there's the dead invader, there's the pistol used to stop the invasion... probably all in the same room. (No, it doesn't specifically say so in the article, but that's not an unreasonable assumption.)

It's sort of like being stopped for speeding, & they use that as an excuse to search the car. What proof of speeding can be found by searching the car?

MAC702 said:
I'm pretty damn sure I can find some full strength Motrin around here that I've long lost the prescription to.
I've always tried to keep my prescriptions in their labelled bottles, doubly so when travelling. Never know when they'll run the check-in line with a drug dog & have a few questions about my toiletries bag. :mad:

davidmcbeth said:
I wouldn't find the guy's idiot friends guilty of murder though
That's what OH law says they did - murder, along with aggravated burglary & conspiracy.
They conspired to commit burglary, and it turned into aggravated burglary when they harmed the residents, and it turned into murder when somebody died. The murder statute doesn't say that one of their victims has to die; it's properly applied if one of the criminals is fatally shot, or even if they cause a fatal car crash when fleeing.

2903.02 Murder
...
(B) No person shall cause the death of another as a proximate result of the offender’s committing or attempting to commit an offense of violence that is a felony of the first or second degree...

2911.11 Aggravated burglary
(A) No person, by force, stealth, or deception, shall trespass in an occupied structure ... when another person other than an accomplice of the offender is present, with purpose to commit ... any criminal offense, if any of the following apply:
(1) The offender inflicts, or attempts or threatens to inflict physical harm on another;
...
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of aggravated burglary, a felony of the first degree

2923.01 Conspiracy
(A) No person, with purpose to commit or to promote or facilitate the commission of ... aggravated burglary... trespassing in a habitation when a person is present or likely to be present... shall do either of the following:
(1) With another person or persons, plan or aid in planning the commission of any of the specified offenses;
(2) Agree with another person or persons that one or more of them will engage in conduct that facilitates the commission of any of the specified offenses

(J) Whoever violates this section is guilty of conspiracy, which is one of the following...
(2) A felony of the next lesser degree than the most serious offense that is the object of the conspiracy, when the most serious offense that is the object of the conspiracy is a felony of the first, second, third, or fourth degree





-
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
That's what OH law says


-

Good detailed "connect-the-dots" .. but still, I would not find them guilty of murder ... in this instance its excessive IMO ... the guy who got shot should take the responsibility for his own actions ... and he did
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Good detailed "connect-the-dots" .. but still, I would not find them guilty of murder ... in this instance its excessive IMO ... the guy who got shot should take the responsibility for his own actions ... and he did

The fact that you would not find them guilty of murder has no bearing on the matter other than to share your personal life view on the extent that one has responsibility for one's actions or how far that responsibility extends. Thank you for sharing.

stay safe.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
MKE

I did not see where the article said that they searched the entire house or anyplace where the action or the defense took place. If you can show where such an overbroad search took place, I'd agree with you.

Anywhere in the house that the intruders went and anywhere from which the renter defended his home would have evidence of what happened and would present PC for a search.

Oh, and one more thing, apparently at least one of the invading party was allowed in as a guest before the invasion proper began. Anyplace in the home that he went is also subject to search. This information and the amount of drugs found comes from my real estate agent who manages the home. He had to research the matter to decide whether to continue renting the home to the two students. Due to the tiny amount of drugs and the apparent justification for the shooting, he saw no reason to kick them out.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
If the facts are as they seem to be, I would find the participants guilty of murder for the very reason that felony murder laws exist: To put people on notice that participating in crimes that carry the likelihood that someone will die as a direct result of the crime amounts to such a disregard for human life that when someone dies, the participants should be thought of as having intent that someone should die. It does not matter who died, just as long as the death is a foreseeable consequence of the crime. Intent follows the bullet.
 

carolina guy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
1,737
Location
Concord, NC
Was there something (like paraphernalia) in plain view (or smell) in the main room, or from the main room where the shooting took place? Also, since at least one of the victims and assailants knew each other, do we know that one of the assailants didn't tell the police they were there to buy/steal drugs? That would be more than enough to get a search warrant.
 
Last edited:

KYGlockster

Activist Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
1,842
Location
Ashland, KY
Was there something (like paraphernalia) in plain view (or smell) in the main room, or from the main room where the shooting took place? Also, since at least one of the victims and assailants knew each other, do we know that one of the assailants didn't tell the police they were there to buy/steal drugs? That would be more than enough to get a search warrant.

Surely you are not serious?

An assailant that attempted to rob you informing the police that he was there to buy drugs is enough to search someone's home?

One, they were there to ROB the occupants of their property, not to purchase or steal anything. Robbery is MUCH different than theft.

Two, someone walking up to a police officer and saying they went into a home to buy or steal drugs does not give probable cause to issue a search warrant. They would need some sort of evidence before a search warrant could be issued, such as a purchase with a CI inside the residence.

Three, do you honestly believe someone that just attempted to rob a home is a good individual to listen to? You HONESTLY believe their own admission is "more than enough" evidence needed to have a search warrant issued on someone's home?

They probably received the warrant after finding the single joint. That, or they got the warrant to search for crime related evidence and stumbled across it.

Yes, if there were items in plain view or a strong odor originating from within the home they COULD have a warrant issued, but I don't believe that was the case.
 

carolina guy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
1,737
Location
Concord, NC
Surely you are not serious?

An assailant that attempted to rob you informing the police that he was there to buy drugs is enough to search someone's home?

One, they were there to ROB the occupants of their property, not to purchase or steal anything. Robbery is MUCH different than theft.

Two, someone walking up to a police officer and saying they went into a home to buy or steal drugs does not give probable cause to issue a search warrant. They would need some sort of evidence before a search warrant could be issued, such as a purchase with a CI inside the residence.

Three, do you honestly believe someone that just attempted to rob a home is a good individual to listen to? You HONESTLY believe their own admission is "more than enough" evidence needed to have a search warrant issued on someone's home?

They probably received the warrant after finding the single joint. That, or they got the warrant to search for crime related evidence and stumbled across it.

Yes, if there were items in plain view or a strong odor originating from within the home they COULD have a warrant issued, but I don't believe that was the case.

Very serious...you do not think that this happens all the time? It is called an informer...and if the police already have RAS (smells, items, victim's actions/statements), then you throw in the statements of the people (even the assailants) at the scene, and I am pretty sure you will always have a judge that will sign the warrant to look for the items in question.

The main thing is not that I am trying to make a justification for the search warrant (I am not), but it is that there is a LOT to the story that is not being said that could have lead to the outcome.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
The fact that you would not find them guilty of murder has no bearing on the matter other than to share your personal life view on the extent that one has responsibility for one's actions or how far that responsibility extends. Thank you for sharing.

stay safe.


Not responsibility ... penalties ... in this specific instance I think that murder charges are just too severe .. I would recommend jury nullification of the charge.


I think that the intent of the law is not to protect thieves (which would be the intent if viewed in the manner it is) but innocent folks.

Some don't like this viewpoint because they think that the charge is OK or that is just the way the law is written, so its OK.

One should not be afraid to re-examine laws or their viewpoints.


Of course, we know whose to blame here: assault rifles and large capacity magazines ....
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Very serious...you do not think that this happens all the time? It is called an informer...and if the police already have RAS (smells, items, victim's actions/statements), then you throw in the statements of the people (even the assailants) at the scene, and I am pretty sure you will always have a judge that will sign the warrant to look for the items in question.

The main thing is not that I am trying to make a justification for the search warrant (I am not), but it is that there is a LOT to the story that is not being said that could have lead to the outcome.

Should the home owner have dragged the body out and locked the door behind him? "uh, no .. you cannot go in" lol
 

zekester

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
664
Location
Uvalde, Texas
Not responsibility ... penalties ... in this specific instance I think that murder charges are just too severe .. I would recommend jury nullification of the charge.


I think that the intent of the law is not to protect thieves (which would be the intent if viewed in the manner it is) but innocent folks.

Some don't like this viewpoint because they think that the charge is OK or that is just the way the law is written, so its OK.

One should not be afraid to re-examine laws or their viewpoints.


Of course, we know whose to blame here: assault rifles and large capacity magazines ....

You my friend, should move to Chicago...
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Very serious...you do not think that this happens all the time? It is called an informer...and if the police already have RAS (smells, items, victim's actions/statements), then you throw in the statements of the people (even the assailants) at the scene, and I am pretty sure you will always have a judge that will sign the warrant to look for the items in question.

The main thing is not that I am trying to make a justification for the search warrant (I am not), but it is that there is a LOT to the story that is not being said that could have lead to the outcome.

None of this matters. The home was a crime scene. There is little doubt that PC exists to search large portions of the home, regardless of anything that the perps said.

Likely there was not PC to search the entire home, but nothing has been stated that the entire home was searched.

Also, only a tiny amount of drugs, inconsequential to the story was found. Why it was even mentioned is beyond me.
 
Top