CA: Thomas Greer as example; Do not Talk to Reporters after a Shooting

Daily Mail via Gun Watch ^ | 28 January, 2015 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Thomas Greer gained fame in July of this year by making some imprudent statements to reporters.   He had shot one of a pair of burglars that had assaulted him in his home.   He said that the woman that he killed, Andrea Miller, had told him that she was pregnant as a ruse to gain advantage and prevent him from shooting her.   Greer is 80 years old, and had his collar bone broken in the assault.  From the dailymail.co.uk:

‘Thomas Greer is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury,’ according to the report signed by Deputy District Attorney Janet Moore.

‘Greer exercised his legal and legitimate right of self-defense when he shot and killed Andrea Miller.’

The investigation makes it seem likely that Greer was "tough talking" to reporters, rather than clearly stating the facts of what happened.  His previous statement: 

'The lady didn't run as fast as the man so I shot her in the back twice. She's dead.. but he got away. She says "don't shoot me, I'm pregnant, I'm gonna have a baby" and I shot her anyway.

The statement did not hold up against forensic analysis.  Mr. Greer fired three shots, two of which struck Miller, once in the left side of the chest, and once in the right knee.  Neither shot is in the back, as stated by Greer.  The shooting happened inside of Greer's home, not outside, as was implied by early reporting. After being shot, Miller fled the home and collapsed in the alley outside.

Presumably, Greer told prosecutors a different version of events, one that was consistent with the physical evidence, probably on the advice of counsel.  

The incident serves as an example of why it is a bad idea to talk to the media after a self defense shooting.  While you have no legal obligation to tell the media the truth, you will be tried in the court of public opinion.  Greer was widely accused of being a cold blooded murderer because of the ill considered statements that he made.  He would have been better served by refusing comment.

I have to give the prosecutor, Janet Moore, credit for thoroughly investigating this case and making the right decision.  It would have been politically correct to take the old white guy's braggadocio at face value and prosecuted him to the full extent of the law. 

It would not have served justice, it would have been a waste of taxpayers money, but it would have been politically correct.

Gus Adams, who has been implicated as Miller's accomplice, is being charged with her murder, under the felony murder rule.   Most states have a version of the rule.   Its essence is that if you are involved in a crime where someone is killed, where the death would not have happened if the crime were not attempted or committed, you can be charged as the person responsible for the death.  From thefreedictionary.com:

A Rule of Law that holds that if a killing occurs during the commission or attempted commission of a felony (a major crime), the person or persons responsible for the felony can be charged with murder.

Generally an intent to kill is not necessary for felony-murder. The rule becomes operative when there is a killing during or a death soon after the felony, and there is some causal connection between the felony and the killing.

 While Mr. Greer was finally found to have been justified in his actions, it could have cost him far more than it did.  His case serves as a strong example to others not to talk to the media.


©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

[DCBryan1]

I made a mistake of talking to a reporterette, too at a brewery. Very charming, beautiful girl. I was asked by her:

"What do you think of the rise of credit card balances of young people?" (At the tip of my tongue was-"Sorry, I don't talk to presstitutes".)

Anyways, I said, "Credit card debt is fine if you are responsible by paying it off every month, especially if you get benefits such as cash back or frequent flier miles".

Guess what showed up on TV? My mug on TV for 3 seconds, and you know what I said? "CREDIT CARD DEBT IS FINE(edit) IF YOU GET BENEFITS".

My boss was waiting for me in my office that morning to get the story. I told him they spliced what I said, and that one of our sales guys could back me up. We contacted the presstitute and her editor and they gave us some BS answer on having to edit for time compression. After that we contacted our HR department and we both agreed to set up our PIO for our firm and NEVER, EVER talk to the press ever again, either formally, or informally in our out of the office.

Lesson learned! The press lies and manufactures what they want to for THEIR agenda.

[luvbach1]

Insist on a search warrant and never waive your rights. make the the cops get a warrant if they have probable cause.

Years ago I had a loud argument (with no violence) with my near-teen daughter (I was a single father) and a neighbor called police. By the time police arrived my daughter had left the house. Two policeman entered my house without permission and walked through it, leaving after finding nothing. I assume they entered on the basis of probable cause to see if a crime had been committed. They didn't seem to need a warrant.

[luvbach1]

One sensible man they were talking to said, “I’m not going to say ‘it sounded like a freight train’ like everyone always does, but it was loud”

But did he then go on to describe it as "looking like a war zone?"

[usnavy_cop_retired]

Wrong. A warrant is not needed if the reason for entering your home is Exigent circumstances. In other words they had a call, (in your case, I assume), that someone was in danger of physical injury. Or, they are in “hot pursuit” of a person believed to have committed a felony. otherwise, they need a warrant to enter.

When they arrive at the door demand they produce a warrant before you let them in. Once in your house anything in plain view, (if illegal, sarc), is evidence that allows them to search more.

Do not allow the cops inside unless they have a warrant!

If the warrant says a gun, they cannot look in an ice cube tray for it since it is not reasonable to find a gun there, (even if you have stolen diamonds hidden there that evidence would be thrown out by the court).

If they are searching for a person they cannot look in the dresser drawers and in the kitchen drawers because it is not reasonable for a person to hide in them. Nor can they look for a person under the couch cushions.

Yea, I’m being silly with the examples but these have been reasons to exclude evidence illegally obtained by cops that have tried to go “beyond” the parameters of the search warrant.

Remember, a warrant must detail what is being looked for and what is to be searched. If the warrant says to search the house, it does not include the car in the driveway, etc.

[BTCM]

I once had a great captain address the crew going to Viet Nam tell us that we talked to the press at great risk. We were not ordered not to talk to the reporters but warned they would put your name in the paper, your butt in the brig and your family on welfare to advance their own career and political opinions.