The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 27, 2011, 12:46 AM   #1
youngunz4life
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
burglar's family gets 270 grand

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/kdvr-...,6188947.story

I don't think this is a drive-by, but have you ever noticed that these type of articles have very little detail or explanation? It seems the people leaving comments about the news story understand; I am just not understanding why the jury doesn't. Does anyone live in this area? The assailant had knives and the business in question had been robbed multiple times. The people robbed weren't charged, so I am guessing again this idiot wasn't shot in the back...again not enough info
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864
youngunz4life is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 01:32 AM   #2
Crazy88Fingers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 934
Perhaps this will shed some light on the story.

http://www.gazette.com/articles/jury...rglar-lot.html

A knife-wielding meth head named Fox jumped a fence into a car lot with an accomplice with the intent to steal something for more drugs. The owner told them to scram. The accomplice jumped back over the fence, Fox remained on the property and was shot by the owner. The grand jury seems to have acknowledged that the property owner had the right to defend his lot. Although, according to Colorado law, their Castle Doctrine doesn't apply to businesses. And Fox wasn't an imminent threat to the lot owners.

I'd have to question how much "companionship and future earnings" this guy would have been good for. But criminal and civil courts have different standards. Read up on the (alleged) O.J. Simpson murders for more info on that. Also, jurors just want to go home.
__________________
"And I'm tellin' you son, well it ain't no fun, staring straight down a .44"
-Lynyrd Skynyrd
Crazy88Fingers is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 02:20 AM   #3
youngunz4life
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
thanx for the story/update. Yeah I was questioning this guy's future worth myself while reading the story.
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864
youngunz4life is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 02:43 AM   #4
Eghad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,231
Criminal and Civil court have no relationship to each other there is no double jeopardy. You may get cleared in a criminal matter but still get taken to civil court. If the guy had died with a weapon in his hand the civil trial outcome may have been different or may not have.

This is where Castle Doctrine laws may play a big part in deciding if you have a defense to a civil case.

The family might be lucky to keep a little over half of that settlement depending on what type of financial arrangement or agreement they had with the lawyers.
__________________
Have a nice day at the range

NRA Life Member
Eghad is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 08:14 AM   #5
mehavey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,821
Quote:
[the intruder] Fox was standing [trying to take shelter] inside a small shed when a .45-caliber rifle bullet passed through the shed’s door and pierced his heart.
Given the situation as described in the article, this was an execution, not defense. I would have voted w/ the jury on this one.
mehavey is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 08:39 AM   #6
Uncle Buck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: West Central Missouri
Posts: 2,561
Sorry, I still think the family should have been required to pay for the ammo.

I guess the part that leaves me feeling like I do is that these guys were committing a crime when the man was shot and killed. If the guy had climbed the fence looking for shelter and to stay warm, that would be one thing, but this was during the commission of a crime.
__________________
Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen.
Uncle Buck is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 08:50 AM   #7
mehavey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,821
Opinions vary.

Crime of theft or not, hiding inside the shed he was no threat.
Execution, pure and simple.
mehavey is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 10:57 AM   #8
Patriot86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
The guy was armed with a knife, technically he is not a threat until within arms reach. Would any of you WAIT for someone to get in arms reach?


Another example of our insane legal system. Thank god here in Illinois, if you shoot someone lawfully in your home you are somewhat shielded from lawsuits.
Patriot86 is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 03:11 PM   #9
Dead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 5, 2000
Location: AoW Land, USA
Posts: 1,933
I can attest to Jurors just want to go home. I was on a juror for 3 weeks for a federal civil case. It was very interesting, especially when a defense witness called another defense witness a liar. LOL. In the end everyone wanted to just get out of there, I did however read the insurance policy that was at the heart of the lawsuit (ugh so many pages) and found a paragraph that basically said the plaintiff did not have a leg to stand on at all. (not that they would have won even if I did not read that)... Everyone wanted to go home, but in the end we did what we had to do to get it right.

Oh and the plaintiff lawyers made more than a few mistakes in presenting evidence, that did not look too good for them either.

I do not know the details about this, did not even read the short story, but if you go around threatening people with a weapon and you get shot/stabbed/injured/kill I think tough luck you got what you deserve.
__________________
Dead [Black Ops]
www.therallypoint.org
Dead is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 03:12 PM   #10
Mr. James
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2001
Location: The Old Dominion
Posts: 1,521
Read the story again. The family laid in ambush for these clowns and came out fully intending to harm them from the drop of the green flag. Heck, they even told the police they would shoot the next intruder found on their property. The late, unlamented Mr. Fox was trying to hide. They shot him through a closed door. He had several knives on his person, but this wasn't discovered until after he was D-E-D dead. In other words, they didn't shoot him because he was threatening them with a knife. They shot him because he was a drug-addicted lowlife coming to steal more of their stuff, and they were damned well not going to have any more of that.

So, this was an execution to protect property. Fox may have been a piece of human detritus, but he didn't commit a capital crime, and he wasn't a threat to the Milanovices. I'm with the jury on this one, to my utter astonishment.

I don't think this article says, but were there ever any criminal charges filed? Or did the prosecutors take a pass because of the totality of the circumstances?
__________________
"...A humble and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Ps. li

"When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law." —Frederic Bastiat
Mr. James is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 09:31 PM   #11
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. James
I don't think this article says, but were there ever any criminal charges filed? Or did the prosecutors take a pass because of the totality of the circumstances?
The article I saw on this case said the prosecuting attorney elected not to file charges. He did send it to a grand jury, which declined to issue an indictment. So -- no crime by the shooters, just a civil settlement for a lot more money than they'll ever be able to pay.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 10:24 PM   #12
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,282
Just for a moment, I'm going to ignore the legal and moral issues for a moment to focus on logic.

This is a classic illustration of the logical problem with shooting people over material possessions. Even if you beat the criminal rap, the civil case will very likely cost you more than you prevented the person from taking or damaging.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 10:28 PM   #13
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,411
That wouldn't float here, in Wyoming, if the Grand Jury didn't indite him, he couldn't be sued.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 10:35 PM   #14
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,233
Quote:
This is a classic illustration of the logical problem with shooting people over material possessions.
I've also postulated moral problems with it in the past.

The case at hand, however, is about one simple thing: vigilantism. The (now) defendants made a truly wretched decision, and I find the intent behind it to be reprehensible.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old August 27, 2011, 10:55 PM   #15
Pbearperry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 9, 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 283
I am in no way trying to put myself in the shoes of the owner who shot the creep.All I can say is,in today's climate,if you don't have to pull the trigger,don't.Juries can be very scary in so many ways.
Pbearperry is offline  
Old August 28, 2011, 08:22 AM   #16
Eghad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,231
If the person was presenting no threat then in a lot places you just used excessive force and would be liable for criminal and civil penalties. Once the threat ceases so should your use of force.

These guys got lucky the grand jury no billed them and the DA isnt going to joust with the windmill.
__________________
Have a nice day at the range

NRA Life Member
Eghad is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 02:04 PM   #17
Hardcase
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2009
Location: Sunny Southern Idaho
Posts: 1,906
I remember reading about this when it happened and thinking that if there was ever a case of calling 911 and telling them to have the cops hotfoot it over because the perps were on the premises, this was it. I mean, you're eyeballing the thieves, they've got no guns and they don't even know you're there.

Tangentially topical, I took a CCW class a while back in which the instructor spent a substantial amount of time talking about why you shouldn't draw that gun. There are a gazillion scenarios best solved by keeping your mitts off the weapon and precious few that involve sending lead downrange. When I read the original story, I felt pretty firmly that this was one of the former.
__________________
Well we don't rent pigs and I figure it's better to say it right out front because a man that does like to rent pigs is... he's hard to stop - Gus McCrae
Hardcase is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 02:29 PM   #18
NJgunowner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,080
The MOST these guys should have done was hold them at gun point and wait for the cops to arrive. There was no call for shooting this guy.
__________________
Sig 1911 Traditional reverse two tone, Sig p226 .40, Sig 556 Swat patrol, Baby Eagle/jerico steel .45
NJgunowner is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 04:40 PM   #19
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,233
Something that worries me about this is the effect it may have in states that haven't yet passed Castle Doctrine laws.

Colorado paved the way for this back in the 1980's. Now we have a case in which a defendant was found justified under that law by a criminal court, but later found guilty by a civil court.

So, someone opposing the passage of Castle Doctrine in, say, North Carolina can now say, "Colorado has a 'make my day' law, and it lets murderers go free!"
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 07:19 PM   #20
Crazy88Fingers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 934
Tom, I believe the Bradies call Castle Doctrine the "Shoot First, Ask Questions Later" law.
__________________
"And I'm tellin' you son, well it ain't no fun, staring straight down a .44"
-Lynyrd Skynyrd
Crazy88Fingers is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 08:48 PM   #21
Eghad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,231
Quote:
The guy was armed with a knife, technically he is not a threat until within arms reach. Would any of you WAIT for someone to get in arms reach?
Was the knife in his hands?

Sounds to me like the guy was retreating and trying to leave the scene.

When that happens its time to let the police do thier job and for us not to be judge, jury and executioner.
__________________
Have a nice day at the range

NRA Life Member
Eghad is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 09:29 PM   #22
Uncle Buck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: West Central Missouri
Posts: 2,561
I do understand that what the people who owned the car lot did was wrong. I do agree they should have called the cops.

But what rankles me is the fact the (Original) criminals' family made money on his crimes.
__________________
Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen.
Uncle Buck is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 09:58 PM   #23
Patriot86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
Quote:
Was the knife in his hands?

Sounds to me like the guy was retreating and trying to leave the scene.

When that happens its time to let the police do thier job and for us not to be judge, jury and executioner.

Unless I am reading the story wrong ( I could be) the storage shed where he was hiding was on the mans property. I know laws are often different for businesses and homes, But I think of it like a criminal went and hid in a backroom in my home.
Patriot86 is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 11:50 PM   #24
tyme
Staff
 
Join Date: October 13, 2001
Posts: 3,155
Hiding in a shed on business property and hiding in a room of a domicile are lightyears apart, legally speaking.
__________________
“The egg hatched...” “...the egg hatched... and a hundred baby spiders came out...” (blade runner)
“Who are you?” “A friend. I'm here to prevent you from making a mistake.” “You have no idea what I'm doing here, friend.” “In specific terms, no, but I swore an oath to protect the world...” (continuum)
“It's a goal you won't understand until later. Your job is to make sure he doesn't achieve the goal.” (bsg)
tyme is offline  
Old August 30, 2011, 12:21 PM   #25
Patriot86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
The bottom line is none of us were there, looking at the location on Google maps I do not even see a small "shed" so the shed was either very small, is no longer there or they are misidentifying the larger structures on the properties as "sheds". The shooter was never convicted of any criminal wrongdoing. The criminals family is getting paid for something that resulted from their criminal relatives actions. That just doesn't sit right with me.


That being said, shooting at a fleeing unarmed suspect (dead guys accomplice) is typically not legal but was clearly done in this case after re-reading the article.
Patriot86 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13404 seconds with 7 queries