View Single Post
Old December 5, 2021, 08:31 PM   #50
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,204
Castle doctrine might be different there. In my state, I think it just means that one hasn't a duty to retreat within the home if met with a sufficiently serious imminent threat. The threat still needs to be present.

Originally Posted by zuk
The context of each act is relevant. It's not illegal to go inside to get a rifle because you are about to murder a squirrel.

If it's part of a string of events that indicate you killed someone while not being in fear of some imminent harm, then it will be relevant to peoples' conclusions about your motive.
Originally Posted by Metal god
Respectfully I'm not sure you understand imminent . If the threat was imminent he wouldn't have time to get a weapon to defend him self . Your logic seems to indicate you must be under attack before going to get your firearm ?
No. My logic indicates that if your conduct doesn't indicate a perception of an imminent and grave threat, you will undermine a defense that requires an imminent and grave threat.

Originally Posted by Metal god
Remember Carruth is on his own property he can go get what ever he wants . What if he turns and grabs a shovel from 10" away and everything plays out the same after and Carruth hits him over the head instead of shooting ?
I don't believe anyone has suggested that Carruth is not free to travel his own property. If he had to leave the argument in the front yard, go inside, down the basement stairs, find a key for the closet where he keeps his garden tools, unlock it, go upstairs and back outside to resume the argument, that's a context that shows deliberation and planning to win an argument rather than defend against a threat that was imminent.

The context is the difference between the recent Wisconsin and Georgia verdicts even though each may feature a shooter in fear of his weapon being taken and used against him.

Originally Posted by Metal god
Then there's the disparity of force to consider . Reed was a much bigger guy and Carruth would likely not do well in a "fair" fight as evidence of being thrown with ease from his porch. Carruth seeing the "intruder" refusing to leave when asked may have thought it might be wise to go retrieve a firearm in case the bigger man decided to escalate the situation when he asked him to leave the next time .
That could be, but Carruth pollutes that narrative when he fires at Reed's feet. Where he re-enters a dispute as an aggressor, he may forfeit his right to employ deadly force.

Originally Posted by Metal god
I ask because I go back to does it matter where he gets the gun from ? What if it was a hand gun and he pulled it from an IWB holster and everything then played out the same ??? Yes he retrieved the firearm but does it matter from where he retrieved it , Does distance matter ?
Yes. If he hopped into his car, drove downtown, filled out a yellow, bought the gun and some ammunition, loaded it, drove back and re-entered the fight, that would matter.

Now, what don't I know about these people? Almost everything. Maybe the big guy was a known psychopath. Maybe little guy had been badly beaten by him before. Maybe little guy picked up on something, a tell, that big guy was about to get viscously violent. The video shows us what happened, but only that, not the context that might have us seeing it differently.

As noted by several, there are lots of apparently bad decisions on that recording.

I can suggest a view of events that would likely end with Carruth being prosecuted in my state. Little guy (LG) doesn't like the disrespect big guy (BG) shows him by failing to leave. LG doesn't feel threatened but also doesn't want to lose the argument. LG has no way to win it on his own, so he goes inside for his rifle, sure this would secure a win. It doesn't have LG's desired effect. BG initiates a yelling and chest bumping contest, an invitation to mutual combat, and doesn't try to take LG's rifle until LG starts shooting. LG doesn't want to lose, especially in front of BG's ex-wife, so he meets the invitation with chest bumping and yelling, and eventually shooting. BG attempts to disarm LG at which point LG feels he is in way over his head and shoots BG.

BG hadn't done anything more threatening than yell about being rooked out of the court scheduled time with his child when LG presented his rifle as part of a dominance display.

Last edited by zukiphile; December 5, 2021 at 08:41 PM.
zukiphile is offline  
Page generated in 0.03309 seconds with 8 queries