Table Turned in PA

Don't mess with her:
http://www.wpxi.com/news/26086086/detail.html?cxntlid=cmg_cntnt_rss

"He was very family-oriented,” said Dwayne Heath Sr. “He loved to be around his siblings."

Every single time that a person, especially a young person, crosses the line into illegal activity, especially violence against others, and then reap what they have sown, there is always a family member or friend saying what a decent, loving individual they were.

It is a shame that this young man is dead. It is a greater shame that someone did not teach him better than to attack someone he most likely perceived as weaker than himself.

If events were as they were portrayed in this article and the DA does not press charges, I sincerely hope that this woman can put this behind her and move on with her life.

FWIW, I think this ought to be in the self-defense folder.

Yeah, I know I don't live in PA, but this one caught my eye.

I smell a civil suit on the horizon. Even if the female defender prevails in court, the legal expenses can amount to thosands of dollars. Thank the jackass Rendell for not signing castle doctrine which would of excluded civil proceedings for those involved in justifiable homocides.

Oh my, if that 17-year-old wasn't dead he'd be in a world of trouble. Carrying concealed without a license, being a minor in possession of a firearm, using a firearm in the commission of a crime, assault & battery, aggravated assault, terroristic threatening, and possibly a few other charges.

Heck, he might even have been tried as an adult!

[rant]
Good grief! WHY do news stories like this ALWAYS include a line something like "the DA hasn't made a decision about charges yet"?? Charges? What charges?? Why would she be facing ANY punishment for defending herself?? It's obvious that the "kid" meant to harm or even kill her - he brought a gun to the meeting!

Unless the story is quite different from what was presented so far, there's not even any grey area here. The "kid" had a gun, the woman was in fear for her life, she defended herself. She should get a medal.
[/rant]

"The woman was treated at the hospital for lacerations. No charges have been filed against her. Police said a final decision on charges will be up to the district attorney." What? The woman disarmed the assailant and shot him with his own gun in self defense. This 'victim as assailant' attitude of the media seems endemic in the east.

Every homocide gets refered to the district attorney's office. No matter how obvious the case of self defense, it still get analyzed. The difficult part is that could take one or two months to come down with a decision.
The days of country justice are over where a person shoots someone in self defense, the sheriff is notified and makes a street decision, end of story.

MKEgal said:

Unless the story is quite different from what was presented so far, there's not even any grey area here. The "kid" had a gun, the woman was in fear for her life, she defended herself. She should get a medal.

Click to expand...

legally, there is a huge grey area in PA. i don't agree with it, but, depending on the details of what happened, it is quite possible the courts would find that once she took the gun from him, she could no longer *reasonably* be in fear for her life. PA law does not allow you to use deadly force against someone who, once second ago, presented a mortal threat if they no longer, at this second, still present that threat.

anyone who carries a gun for self-defense should read the very sobering case of Commonwealth v. Wooten. (http://pa.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.\PA\PA2\1988\19880810_0043292.PA.htm/qx)

of course, the details of specific cases matter, but it would be a mistake to just assume you can go ahead and shoot someone who attacks you after you successfully take the gun away from him. (again, imho, you pretty much just should be able to, but that is not the way PA law works--and the recently vetoed legislation would not have changed that.)

What would prevent the robber from attempting to take the weapon back and shooting? I would think that if the robber was not running away shooting would be justified as self defense.

Commonwealth v. Wooten

I've read the summary of the Wooten case and it's alarming on a few levels to me. I've got to research PA's mandatory sentencing as well as our federal sentencing guidelines with regards to legally defending yourself with a firearm and/or relating to a deemed "weapon". If anyone has any specific leads for me to follow, please let me know. Thank you.

madinpa said:

I've read the summary of the Wooten case and it's alarming on a few levels to me. I've got to research PA's mandatory sentencing as well as our federal sentencing guidelines with regards to legally defending yourself with a firearm and/or relating to a deemed "weapon". If anyone has any specific leads for me to follow, please let me know. Thank you.

Click to expand...

While I know little of criminal law, as opposed to civil law, as one who is not an attorney, years of experience as a Pro Se have shown me that and thanks to the Internet, there are a host of sites up and running, sites which are owned and operated by individuals for reasons which in many cases are clearly personal and many of these clearly quite professional. Finding them is another matter but time spent looking for them is time well spent.

While the Wooden case may seem "alarming" you might want to keep in mind something I was taught decades ago by a former prosecuting attorney, one who worked for more than thirty years at Treasury ... From the views of law and law enforcement, along with Massachussetts, at the federal level, Pennsylvania is the laughing stock of the Union.

tyc