WA:Spokane homeowner who shot carjacker charged with manslaughter

mynorthwest.com ^ | 29 May, 2013 | Jillian Raftery

[JimRed]

Gail said he saw Brendon raise his arm in his direction; he thought Brendon had a gun. But police later searched the car and didn't find a weapon.

That's why you keep a cheap throwaway around, which you've never handled without gloves (the ammo as well).

[Navy Patriot]

Will a jury convict him?

If he is lucky enough to get an informed juror on each jury, and he has enough money to hold out, he will be free but broke.

[RikaStrom]

Sheesh, I hate to see that this came out of Spokane.

[Little Ray]

Not if there is one sane person on it.
On the other hand, this is Washington state, so sane people are kind of rare, and are probably kicked out of jury pools...

[Jack of all Trades]

I live in a supposedly well-to-do suburb in Connecticut and I wouldn’t do it. I suppose it comes down to the zeal of the prosecutor, the skill of the defense and the luck of the draw with the jury. Watch out for the civil suit though.

[bandleader]

Hope not.They should give him at least TWO awards.One for ridding society of vermin,and another for being a damn good shot!

[puppypusher]

Guess who was arrested and what charge was filed?

The home owner was probably arrested for unlawful discharge of a firearm and probably Reckless Endangerment.

He,The home owner would have been better off just telling the Perp to lay down on the floor until the Law enforcement people come and pick him up.

People have to Remember that you can’t use deadly force unless its being used against you and you fear for your life.

You better be able to describe that fear in detail so a jury will agree with your decision to use deadly force.

Its best to read your states Firearms and use of force Statutes so you know what to do before hand.

[Pollster1]

If you are a woman who has just been the victim of a home invasion and the perp has just brutally raped you and left you for dead . . . You suddenly notice your hand is touching your pistol under your sofa. In a fit of adrenalin, you grab the pistol, force yourself up, aim the pistol and shoot him in the doorway. He dies of his wounds. You are guilty of first degree manslaughter (at the least) because the guy was leaving and not a current threat to your life.

If you're smart, you are only guilty of perjury, and it's not provable in court.

The rapist turned back, said he was going to shoot/stab/beat you to death, took a step toward you, and only then, when your life was in immediate danger, did you decide to shoot. In the moment it took your shaky hand to squeeze the trigger, he turned away, so the bullet hit him in the back, but at the time you started to pull the trigger, your life was in immediate danger.

(1) Don't give any details, truthful or not, without a lawyer, and
(2) don't recant or waver once you have decided how and why your life was in immediate danger when you shot that predator in the back.

[jwalsh07]

Police investigators recommended no charges but somehow you send the DA know better. I was just wondering how.

[matt1234]

Will a jury convict him?

Not if I'm on the jury.

Lessons:

(1) Know your state laws about firearms and use of force.

(2) Lock your car when warming it up.

[SeaDragon]

Sad to see.

[vette6387]

“Will a jury convict him? “

Hopefully not, Spokane is in the “rational part” of Washington just a few minutes from Idaho.

[stormer]

That's why we have Districts Attorney. Do you really want the police to determine who (and who not) should be charged with crimes? I have a feeling that the DA’s investigators have a better idea as to the legality of actions, and the burden of proof required to enforce the law.

[jwalsh07]

You must have missed the part where DA’s are political positions subject to the political winds and inherent human failings. The way law enforcement usually works is cops make the arrest and then the DA chooses to prosecute, plea bargain or drop the case. This is an anomaly wreaking of anti-gun politics.

[stormer]

Yeah, that’s a good idea - compound the crime by obstructing justice and perjury. Believing the shooting is justified despite the mistake of thinking the thief was armed is one thing, but actively engaging in behavior that demonstrates a consciousness of guilt is quite another. Are you that dishonest in other aspects of your life as well?

[stormer]

You apparently don’t believe that police operations are subject to political winds and inherent human failings.

[jwalsh07]

Cops are not political animals. You really don’t understand the difference between rank and file cops and elected District Attorneys?

[The Cajun]

Sounds to me like the perp would have been armed and dangerous had he been able to drive.

Cars kill a lot more people than guns each year.

Gail Herbert Gerlach had a right to fear for his life and responded appropriately.

Just good old common sense.

[stormer]

Yeah, right. Anyway, it’s not the rank and file cops that make the decision to recommend prosecution.

[Stegall Tx]

The law is even more confusing in Texas. You may only use deadly force to stop a theft after dark (again, this is Texas law only ... check your local laws). When is it actually “after dark”? Another bit of confusion.

Short version ... it’s usually not OK to use deadly force unless you reasonably believe your life is in danger, and that does not seem to be the case here.

But I’m just talking about Texas here. I have no knowledge about other parts of the nation.