They were robbing him for the third day in a row?

He shot her in the head with an air rifle and then her getaway driver bailed?


There's some more to this story.

Bump, just checking if anyone has any new info on this case.

Very curious to know if this homeowner qualifies for the "threat of bodily harm" in terms of his use of an air rifle against the lady who broke into his house.

Yep.  She was a good person.  She took a little at a time.  Not plenty one time.  That's the sign of a good person.  Come back 3 times and only take small kine each time.

Wassamatta dis ole man.......

Seriously, though, the laws suck in this fricken state.

Bump, just checking if anyone has any new info on this case.

Very curious to know if this homeowner qualifies for the "threat of bodily harm" in terms of his use of an air rifle against the lady who broke into his house.

It would all depend on what he told the police as why he shot her in the head.  Use of deadly force law, the shooter to claim self defense only needs to "believe" that they are in danger of death, serious injury, rape, kidnapping, or sodomy.

It would all depend on what he told the police as why he shot her in the head.  Use of deadly force law, the shooter to claim self defense only needs to "believe" that they are in danger of death, serious injury, rape, kidnapping, or sodomy.

I believe the standard is not whether the person can convince others of what they believed, but instead whether or not a reasonable person in the same circumstances could hold such a belief -- that they are in danger of death, serious injury, rape, kidnapping, or sodomy.

It's impossible to prove or disprove an actual belief at a given moment.

An extreme example would be testifying you felt threatened by a 4' 5" 60-yr-old woman with a potato peeler.  The prosecution can't prove you didn't believe that, but was it reasonable?

I believe the standard is not whether the person can convince others of what they believed, but instead whether or not a reasonable person in the same circumstances could hold such a belief -- that they are in danger of death, serious injury, rape, kidnapping, or sodomy.

It's impossible to prove or disprove an actual belief at a given moment.

An extreme example would be testifying you felt threatened by a 4' 5" 60-yr-old woman with a potato peeler.  The prosecution can't prove you didn't believe that, but was it reasonable?

Was it the pointy potato peeler that can stab someone with or the rounded one that cannot stab with?  Serious injury is defined as the laceration/puncture of an organ or loss of motor function.  The skin is an organ, so even the rounded one could slice someones skin (organ).  Then add in the potato peeler is diverted from it's intended use so now it's a "deadly/dangerous weapon".

I'm just messing with you.  I get what your example was saying and you are right "what would a reasonable person believe".

Was it the pointy potato peeler that can stab someone with or the rounded one that cannot stab with?  Serious injury is defined as the laceration/puncture of an organ or loss of motor function.  The skin is an organ, so even the rounded one could slice someones skin (organ).  Then add in the potato peeler is diverted from it's intended use so now it's a "deadly/dangerous weapon".

I'm just messing with you.  I get what your example was saying and you are right "what would a reasonable person believe".

"What if's" aside, if the reasonable man or woman agrees the potato peeler in the hands of a petit, old lady represented a danger to the defendant, then he's got a good chance of acquittal.

He may, however, have to surrender his Man Card.