View Poll Results: What do you think the prosecutor should do?

Voters
13. You may not vote on this poll
  • The shooter should be charged for killing Fluker.

    0 0%
  • The shooter should not be charged for killing Fluker. He was defending himself.

    0 0%
  • The shooter should not be charged. He's 76-years-old.

    0 0%
  • The shooter should not be charged because Fluker et al. robbed the couple.

    3 23.08%
  • No jury would ever convict the shooter. Jury nullification is definitely appropriate.

    3 23.08%
  • Even though Fluker did not have a gun, the shooter was still in reasonable fear of his life.

    1 7.69%
  • In the end, I was not there. I have no opinion whatsoever about this.

    6 46.15%
  • I think the shooter should be charged with murder but can't force myself to vote that way.

    0 0%
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Robbery, shooting case is legally complex

  1. #1
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Here's an interesting case. This account probably has enough information for most of us to pick a preferred outcome on the possibility of charges being filed by the prosecutor.

    Note: This is not a court of law. You cannot convict or absolve the still unnamed shooter.

    This is just a forum and you are just expressing an opinion.





    Robbery, shooting case is legally complex
    One issue: Whether man feared for his life when he caught up to teens and killed one.



    By Ely Portillo and David Perlmutt

    Monday, Aug. 24, 2009



    Markus Fluker

    Legal experts say the decision of whether to charge a 76-year-old man who allegedly shot and killed a 15-year-old robbery suspect will hinge on many factors, primarily whether the man thought his life was in danger.

    The issue is complicated by the fact that the shooting happened away from the house, after the robbers had left.

    In 29 years as a criminal defense lawyer in Charlotte, George Laughrun said he's never seen a case with so many “twists and turns.”

    The son of the alleged shooter said his father feared for his life. The mother of the dead teen said the man should have just called police.

    Police still hadn't named the shooter as of Sunday night. But the son of C.L. McClure said his father chased down four teenagers who broke into his house Saturday afternoon and robbed him and his wife in the Newell community off East W.T. Harris Boulevard in northeast Charlotte.

    Charlotte-Mecklenburg police say the robbery victim shot and killed one of the teens, 15-year-old Marcus Antonio Steven Fluker. The son, Larry, confirmed it was his father who fired the shots.

    The robbery victim was tied up as the teens ransacked the house, police said. At least one of the robbers had a gun, police said. A police report said the teenagers took jewelry, a black wallet, cash, a .38 revolver and a gold Masonic ring.

    The teenagers ran from the house on Grier Road, police said. The man freed himself, had his wife call 911, and drove after them, police said.

    When he caught up with them on Ginger Lane, about two-tenths of a mile from the house, police say he shot and killed Fluker.

    His mother, Felicia Fluker, said Sunday her son was not a bad kid.

    “Marcus is not that type of person,” she said. “He just got caught up that day with the wrong crowd.”

    On Sunday a group of family and friends gathered to remember Marcus, a freshman at Independence High School.

    “I hate what happened,” his mother said. The man “could've just called police.”

    Charlotte criminal attorney Bob Trobich said District Attorney Peter Gilchrist has the discretion to file a wide range of charges – from no charges to homicide.

    “The devil is in the details,” Trobich said.

    For C.L. McClure, there's the issue that his home was invaded, and he and his wife were robbed.

    “You've got the old adage, ‘A man's home is his castle,'” said Laughrun, a former prosecutor. “But you've got a cooling-off period in this case. Even if they were threatened, or felt threatened, you still can't walk down the street like in the Old West and take care of justice yourself.”

    There are the ages of the dead teenager and the alleged assailant. The jury could be sympathetic to either.

    “This man would probably be 78 before he went to trial. Is that someone 12 citizens of Mecklenburg County would want to send to prison?” Laughrun said.

    Yet the robbery was over when the teenager was shot.

    “A jury would have to decide, ‘Did he deserve to be shot for that?' And did someone have the right to be judge, jury and executioner?” Laughrun said.

    There are also issues of whether the evidence will show the robbery victim shot in self-defense, and whether he reasonably feared he was going to be shot or harmed.

    “From a prosecutor's standpoint, you got to ask, ‘If you were so afraid of this guy, why were you going after him?'” Laughrun said.

    “It's going to be a tough call for a prosecutor to make.”

    Tony Scheer, a Charlotte criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor, says the case will hinge on whether the man thought he was in imminent danger.

    “Bottom line, if the evidence supports his belief that the young man was wheeling on him, he likely won't be charged,” said Scheer, who prosecuted homicide and violent crime cases for Gilchrist in the mid-1990s.

    Larry McClure told the Observer on Saturday that his father told him he thought one of the robbers had a gun when he caught up with them, and he fired when the suspect turned towards him. Larry McClure could not be reached for comment Sunday.

    The three other teens were arrested and charged with second-degree burglary, robbery with a dangerous weapon and conspiracy to commit robbery.

    Police have identified them as Joseph Graves, 17, Matthew Everett Morgan, 17, and Tahjaue Wiley, 18. Morgan has been convicted of having a weapon on school property and is awaiting trial on an unrelated charge of armed robbery.

    Fluker's mother said her son had not been arrested or jailed before. The Observer could not check criminal records for him because he was a minor.


    http://www.charlotteobserver.com/top...ry/905371.html

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    Sounds like he should have followed Hankt's postulate of civilian self-defense

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    WARNING:

    Fellas,

    HankT has a history here of posting news stories that generate heated debate and argument, most of which seems to stem from assumptions readers make to fill in for lack of detail in the news story.

    HankT also has a history here of numerous unnecessary sniping little comments, needling people.

    I consider that he feeds on the discord and acrimony he creates, that is to say he enjoys it.

    One way to short-circuit thisis to stick to the facts of the story, be careful of your assumptions, and don't argue with each other.

    ..................................



    HankTquoted:
    SNIP...“Bottom line, if the evidence supports his belief that the young man was wheeling on him, he likely won't be charged,” said Scheer, who prosecuted homicide and violent crime cases for Gilchrist in the mid-1990s.

    Larry McClure told the Observer on Saturday that his father told him he thought one of the robbers had a gun when he caught up with them, and he fired when the suspect turned towards him. Larry McClure could not be reached for comment Sunday...
    [/quote]Hank is getting more sophisticated at inviting discord, even posting a poll. The poll question options are kinda revealing.

    If hedidn't wantto see arguments, whybe vague about the amount of information needed? Why not just say there are two key legal points that areup in the air and until we know those, everything else is pretty much speculation?

    1) Did the kidturn on the old man?

    2) Does self-defense law in that state permit the77-year old to pursue the crooks? Or, does the law say that by pursuing them he isre-igniting the situation.Possibly even introducing the element whereby the kid is now possibly in reasonable fear for his life from the77-year oldand possibly justified inturning to shoot the77-year old?

    So, until we know those points, we really can't say.

    But that is HankT for you. Introduces news stories with vague points in them. And arguments seem to often get started over those vague points.

    Please keep it civil guys in case Hank really is introducing this stuff just to start fights that he can sit back and enjoy.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    ParkHills, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    970

    Post imported post

    Who cares Hank, the kid would've just moved on up the line the more brazen he got with every little haul of booty!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    ParkHills, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    970

    Post imported post

    Who cares Hank, the kid would've just moved on up the line the more brazen he got with every little haul of booty!

  6. #6
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    Two words for you:

    Jury Nullification




    The guy can be guilty as sin in both the letter and the spirit of the law and if the jury wants to, they can acquit him.

    Look at the case in Texas involving Joe Horn.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Where is the option to: "Have the Judge call HankT to get the authoritative answer"?
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Walton County, Georgia, ,
    Posts
    475

    Post imported post

    So was the old man wrong in trying to get his stuff back? If you're robbed and then confront the robbers after the robbery (in this case very shortly after) do you have a right to get your stuff back? What about using force to acquire your property back? Would it be considered armed robbery if you used a weapon to "rob" someone of property they just stole from you?

    If you want to go based on the law then it all depends on whether the man was fearful for his life. He could have very well confronted the teens while they were walking away with his stuff and then been in fear for his life, or he may have just gunned them down. The witnesses seem to be 3 criminals, the victim, and the dead criminal.

    If I was the prosecutor I would have the police get a better story before I do anything. If I was a juror I would not convict based upon the evidence as of present.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    N00blet45 wrote:
    So was the old man wrong in trying to get his stuff back? If you're robbed and then confront the robbers after the robbery (in this case very shortly after) do you have a right to get your stuff back? What about using force to acquire your property back? Would it be considered armed robbery if you used a weapon to "rob" someone of property they just stole from you?

    If you want to go based on the law then it all depends on whether the man was fearful for his life. He could have very well confronted the teens while they were walking away with his stuff and then been in fear for his life, or he may have just gunned them down. The witnesses seem to be 3 criminals, the victim, and the dead criminal.

    If I was the prosecutor I would have the police get a better story before I do anything. If I was a juror I would not convict based upon the evidence as of present.
    I was trying to think of a way to pen my thoughts, and this is pretty close; except for a recent OJ case where he was convicted of armed robbery for attempting to "steal" his property back.

    The article seems to be light on information.

    HankT wrote:
    The robbery victim was tied up as the teens ransacked the house, police said. At least one of the robbers had a gun, police said. A police report said the teenagers took jewelry, a black wallet, cash, a .38 revolver and a gold Masonic ring.
    One robber had a gun, and another gun was acquired in the robbery.

    He might get a jury to believe he feared for his life, if he can also get a jury to believe he was not being a vigilante for following them.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    460

    Post imported post

    I would point out that jury nullification is ALWAYS pertinent. The jury in EVERY case should consider whether the law is constitutional and just in their opinion, and whether it should apply in this particular case. It is NOT up to the prosecutor to decide if a person is guilty or not- that is why we have trial y jury in this country. It is prosecutor's job to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant not only violated the law, but that the law itself should apply in each particular case.

    If the jury decides to convict, then that's the judgment, as long as they have been informed about their responsibilities regarding jury nullification (which they never are). If I were on the jury, and had only the information presented in the OP, I would vote to acquit. Other information may or not change that assessment.

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Kill em all.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    Charging the old man is one thing, getting a conviction will depend on the evidence the prosecuter presents to the jury. I won't be on that jury, so I won't be hearing the evidence. Can't make a judgement call, but don't think the old man is out of the woods on this one.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    Personally the way I feel is that the Old Man should be arrested for not getting rid of the other 3 scumbags too. However that is not an option so I say just let him go.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    560

    Post imported post

    I did not vote, because the voting options is tied to some pre-supposed opinion. There is a "The shooter should be charged" plain and simple. Where is the plain and simple "The shooter should not be charged"? Really nice biased poll.

    Anyhow, I don't think he should be charged. As far as I'm concerned, they were still in the act of committing the crime of armed robbery against the man while he was attempting to get his stuff back, based on some assumptions I'm attaching to it in lieu of full information. I'm assuming that he didn't drive up and open fire, but rather demanded that they drop his stuff that they were stealing, and shot when a firearm was presented against him. If it turns out that he drove up and started shooting before any interaction, my opinion would go the other way. As quoted in the story, the devil is in the details.

    You don't commit armed robbery and get to have people say "he should have just". No. You show up with a firearm, tie someone up, and at gunpoint take their stuff...well, getting shot is something that is a real consequence of that action. If he was just in with a bad crowd that day...well, that was a poor choice, and I'm sorry to hear it, and I'm sorry he's dead. He still put himself in a position where getting shot was a valid response to his actions.

  15. #15
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    NightOwl wrote:
    As far as I'm concerned, they were still in the act of committing the crime of armed robbery against the man while he was attempting to get his stuff back, based on some assumptions I'm attaching to it in lieu of full information. I'm assuming that he didn't drive up and open fire, but rather demanded that they drop his stuff that they were stealing, and shot when a firearm was presented against him.
    [Shaking head slowly]

    NightOwl...NightOwl...NightOwl....

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoqUwyHseg4



  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    560

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    [Shaking head slowly]

    NightOwl...NightOwl...NightOwl....

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoqUwyHseg4

    Hank...Hank...Hank...go play games with someone else, if you have something to say, come out and say it.

  17. #17
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    405

    Post imported post

    NightOwl wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    [Shaking head slowly]

    NightOwl...NightOwl...NightOwl....

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoqUwyHseg4

    Hank...Hank...Hank...go play games with someone else, if you have something to say, come out and say it.
    Hah!
    Don't say you weren't warned.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •