Posted on 08/15/2018 9:48:53 AM PDT by Ikeon
HEADLINES ..A local man shot and killed his neighbor over a 30$ debt- Reads the local head line.
The local fish wrap reported Mr. A went to Mr. B's house to confront him over 30$ Mr.B owned Mr.A... Mr.B answers the door and Mr A confronted him about money owed, an arguement ensued and Mr. A shot Mr. B in the chest and fled. Several witnesses identified Mr A as the shooter, most notable was his wife and kids who were standing in the house when Mr B was shot and saw the whole thing! The police were called and a manhunt ensued and Mr A was captured in the woods a few hours later..
Fast forward Mr. A is now on trial for Murder 1..
Mr A knows he killed Mr B, but claims he was on PCP and he never meant to kill Mr B, he brought to gun to Mr B's house hoping to scare him.
NOW FOR THE REST OF THE STORY
As old to me by a first hand account of the trial..
A&B were long time friends. A and B were the kind of friends who shared drugs together, hung out, and lived next door to each other. On the day B died, A went to his friends house (B) with a loaded .25 acp pistol wanting to scare B into giving him the 30$ B owned him. A always carryed a weapon because he was a drug dealer and had been jumped and robbed in his own neighborhood. B answered the door and an arguement ensued, A pulls his gun and points it at B, B says " you got me" and shruggs his shoulders and smiles at A.. then shuts the door. thats when A shot 4x thru the door, killing B in front of his wife and kids. A runs off into the woods not knowing if B was shot and killed but knew he'd screwed up.
the paper made a big deal out of the "MANHUNT FOR THE KILLER" the truth is A's father took the cops right to him after finding him first and making sure he DIDN'T KNOW HE KILLED B. the mans father didn't want A killing himself. A gave himself up when his father lead the police to him.
the state charged A with 1st degree murder
During the trial it was established A shot B - no issue, A admitted shooting thru the door not intending to hit anyone, he said during target practice his .25 wouldn't penetrate a 2x6. so he didn't think it would go thru the door.
During the trial MR A's attorney tried to bring up the PCP use as clouding A's mind that day. My friend said the jury never considered it a possible excuse for murder
There are a few more details left out of the newspaper that were never brought up in court. Mr A was a runt 5'6" 135# Mr B 9 the deceased was 6'2" over 200# - the defense lawyer asked the jury after the trial if they knew the "size " of Mr. B.
The state wasted the jurys time afraid the jury was buying the PCP defense that they introduced as evidence video showing MR A sitting in a police car for 40 minutes doing nothing out of the ordinary, then they showed a 2 hour interagation room with A sitting by himself. 2 HOURS OF a GUY SITTING BY HIMSELF.to prove he wasn't on PCP.. something the jury didn't really consider anyway.
The sad part about this whole case is the jury was divided on racial lines. it was blacks understanding sometimes things get heated and A did kill B after B challenged A to shoot him and shut the door on him, it was a dangerous reckless act by A but not pre-meditated, the whites on the jury felt bringing a gun to someones house meant he intended bodily harm to B. and it was therefor pre-meditated murder 1.
another point that shouldn't have mattered - A & B were both black
There are a lot of discussions on this page about people killing each other over an arguement. I thought I would throw this out and let you all comment before I finish with the verdict.
Check his FR profile.
For example, you might be questioned by police on the shooting of a co-worker you went out for drinks with the night before. You might say something like "I never really liked the guy and not many people did, so I'm not surprised somebody tried to do him in."
BANG! The cops now have MOTIVE (you didn't like the guy) and OPPORTUNITY (you were with him the night of the shooting).
Please define crap. its just an off the top of my head discussion piece. I didnt set out to write the a novel and person A and person B are a way to follow a story that is not a cut and dried case. We often past judgements on a fraction of a story. Im giving you more info. If you dont like my writing, I dont care. Maybe someone else has some insite they want to add.
Friends (true friends) don’t shoot friends over a $30 debt. PERIOD...
Get a peep hole so you can see if it’s that friend you owe $30 to before you open the door.
the eye opener to this whole thing for me was the jury was split for a couple of days. And it wasn’t racism. It was 2 different sets of personal experiences with both sides never bothering to let go of their own beliefs to try and understand what the other side was feeling or seeing in the whole situation. We all need to get along to get along and putting yourself in someone elses shoes means you have to empty your mind if your own beliefs and really really relax and listen to what someone esle is saying. Black folks from rural areas are used to some things white folks never experience and white folks from white neighborhoods never had to deal with a black person whos gone off the rails. Black jurers saw this as mostly normal waving a gun around when theres drugs and money involved and figured the guy didnt mean to kill his friend. Theres a guy who killed his best friend by doing something totally stupid. Blacks dont want this guy running free. but theydont see the death penalty as necessary in the case of ann over reaction to a challenge from the deceased. They see the dead mans family and the killers family seeing the whole situation move along to a sad conclusion. whites on the jury saw the whole thing in reverse. A man is dead, lets find the killer and question him, have a trial and then we’ll decide what to do with the murderer. It wasnt racism, it was 2 different ways of looki g at the whole.
Berger wasn’t a power mad district attorney.
Its clearly murder...
Wanton disregard for human life... That’s murder.
Discharging a firearm in the direction of a human being, whether you think the wall between you will stop the bullet or not is depraved indifference.
Its not 1st degree murder, but it is murder.
If the perp had even a remotely good lawyer he would have worked a plea deal.....
Second degree murder or whatever they call it in that jurisdiction. Not a death penalty case by any stretch of the imagination.
If the dude behaves in prison, he’ll probably be out in 12 to 15 years. (He’s going to do more than the minimum because it was drug related - parole board will probably take that into account and pass his first couple of tries at parole.)
This is clear cut murder, but its not first degree murder... not sure of the state statutes, but showing wanton disregard for human life is murder in most states..
If the prosecution went for first degree murder, then they probably overplayed their hand... Honestly given the facts of this case, if the defendant had a half way decent lawyer, should have worked a plea deal for lesser murder charge or manslaughter, and never seen a court room.
If a reasonable deal was offered, and the defendant decided to take his chances at trial, then he probably was given very bad advice.
Get person A a 357 magnum, then he'd only have to use one round.
Who cares what two meth heads do?
What’s this 30$?
God Forgives, I don't, nor do I care because as you point out, God Cares.
I'll go back to my original statement, 2 meth heads, {other than family} who cares?
Drug addiction is merciless, and while I feel for the families of the addicts, the addicts made a choice, and not a good one.
May God have mercy on their souls, I have none to give.
No but if you had in addition to the peep hole, a bullet proof door....
I tried to give as many details as possible that were never printed, but some people can’t get past my writing of 30$ vs. $30 or Mr A and Mr B, or the fact I an not a writer for a living. So for all those people here’s the printed story instead. https://wtop.com/charles-county/2018/08/md-man-convicted-of-fatally-shooting-neighbor-2-days-before-christmas-over-30/
No good deed ever goes unpunished.
Using a .25 ACP is clear that there was no intent to kill.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.