• 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.

Man's family angered by self-defense ruling

cyberdogg

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Dec 1, 2007
Messages
19
Location
Rochester, New York, USA
imported post

Not that Salt Lake Tribune is any better (infamous for its editorial biases against gun rights this year), but the article is interesting nonetheless.

There should be a state law where the proven criminal/aggressor's family's case be thrown out ofcourt upon conclusive evidence the criminal/aggressor behaved so irrationally as to be truly threatening bodily harm with intent to murder towards others.

In this case, it's justifiable homicide. Thehot-headed man's family members who filed the lawsuit suing the person who shot the aggressor in self-defense are idiots seeking judicial revenge.

--------------

The family of Mike J. Mays, who was slain by an off-duty security guard, said they are "very upset" by Salt Lake County prosecutors' decision not to press charges.
"I totally think it was unjustifiable . . . at least they could have written him a ticket, something," said Mays' first wife, Holly Mays, 49. "I think now people think you can basically open fire in a residential area and say, 'I did it in self-defense.' "
Prosectors last week concluded that George Harrison, 59, shot Mays in self-defense in a July 9 confrontation between the two men that started when Mays was across the street from Mama's Southern Plantation restaurant, 1394 S. West Temple, according to a news release from the prosecutor's office. [...]

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_10099713
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

Poster child for a castle doctrine law in Utah barring civil suits in cases where the authorities or a court of law declare the shooting justified.
 

Comp-tech

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
934
Location
, Alabama, USA
imported post

cyberdogg wrote:
There should be a state law, in every state, where the proven criminal/aggressor's family's case be thrown out ofcourt upon conclusive evidence the criminal/aggressor behaved so irrationally as to be truly threatening bodily harm with intent to murder towards others.
There...I fixed it
 

Tucker6900

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
1,279
Location
Iowa, USA
imported post

demnogis wrote:
Does California adhere to Castle Law?
It does not appear so.

States with a Stand-your-ground Law
No duty to retreat anywhere.

Alaska

[*]Colorado (Colorado Revised Statutes Section 18-1-704.5 Use of deadly physical force against an intruder.)
[*]Connecticut
[*]Hawaii (Retreat required outside the home if it can be done in "complete safety.")
[*]Maine (Deadly force justified to terminate criminal trespass AND another crime within home; duty to retreat not specifically removed)
[*]Maryland See Maryland self-defense (Case-law, not statute, seems to have incorporated the castle-doctrine into Maryland self-defense law.)
[*]Massachusetts
[*]Michigan (more recent law--Act 309 of 2006--does not relieve duty to retreat "unless [deadly force is] necessary to prevent imminent death;" this represents no change from common law, which does not require retreat unless it can be safely done)
[*]Missouri (Extends Castle Doctrine to one's vehicle)
[*]Ohio (Extends to vehicles of self and immediate family; effective September 8th, 2008. Section 2901.09
[*]New Jersey ("Statues" link in sidebar, see New Jersey Statues 2C:3-4, retreat required outside home if actor knows he can avoid necessity of deadly force in complete safety, etc.)
[*]North Carolina
[*]Rhode Island
[*]West Virginia
[*]Wyoming [/list] Idaho (Homicide is justified if defending a home from "tumultuous" entry; duty to retreat not specifically removed)

[*]Illinois (Use of deadly force is justified if defending a home from "tumultuous" entry; duty to retreat not specifically removed)
[*]Kansas (§ 21-3212. Use of force in defense of dwelling. A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that it appears to him and he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's unlawful entry into or attack upon his dwelling.)
[*]Minnesota (Homicide justified to prevent the commission of a felony in the home)
[*]Montana (Deadly force justified to prevent felony in the home)
[*]Utah
[*]Washington [/list] edit] States with no known Castle Law
  • Iowa (Law does not require retreat from home, but may require retreat within the home)
  • Pennsylvania (Relevant statute not found; "Stand your ground" legislation pending[17][/suP])
  • Virginia
 
Top