Skip to comments.
Accused Burglar Sues Homeowner Who Shot Him
Channel 3000 (WISC-TV) (Wisconsin) ^
| 9/21/06
| n/a
Posted on 09/23/2006 10:14:36 AM PDT by kiriath_jearim
MADISON, Wis. -- An accused burglar who fell through the roof of a Janesville home and was shot is now suing the homeowner who shot him.
Kurt Prochaska was arrested last October and charged with burglary, WISC-TV reported.
The homeowner, Michael Rainiero, said he shot Prochaska after he refused to leave the house.
Prochaska's lawsuit claimed Rainiero used excessive force and that he intentionally shot him in the back, trying to sever his spinal cord.
The Rock County district attorney believed Rainiero acted in self-defense and never pursued charges against him.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: banglist; crime; frivolouslawsuits
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-70 next last
To: kiriath_jearim
2
posted on
09/23/2006 10:17:58 AM PDT
by
Dan Nunn
To: kiriath_jearim; RKBA Democrat; river rat; SandRat
This is completely absurd, the very difinition of a frivolous lawsuit. One would hope for it to be laughed out of court, but with the number of liberal judges, it could proceed.
3
posted on
09/23/2006 10:18:12 AM PDT
by
Clintonfatigued
(Nihilism is at the heart of Islamic culture)
To: kiriath_jearim
Maybe the home owner should counter sue for the cost of repair to the roof and the bullet used.
4
posted on
09/23/2006 10:18:45 AM PDT
by
Texican72
To: kiriath_jearim
Michael Rainiero needs to use a larger weapon and place his shots better.
5
posted on
09/23/2006 10:19:22 AM PDT
by
HuntsvilleTxVeteran
("Remember the Alamo, Goliad and WACO, It is Time for a new San Jacinto")
To: Clintonfatigued
Bad shot, dead people don't sue.
6
posted on
09/23/2006 10:19:38 AM PDT
by
baltoga
To: kiriath_jearim
The problem here is, with our hilarious and out of control judicial system, there is a "judge" and a group of twelve morons out there that will agree with this scumbag.
7
posted on
09/23/2006 10:20:34 AM PDT
by
FlingWingFlyer
(You can't defeat your enemy unless you are willing to get down in the mud with him.)
To: kiriath_jearim
Note to self - make sure they're dead
8
posted on
09/23/2006 10:21:26 AM PDT
by
Lexington Green
(Are we as free as we used to be?)
To: baltoga
You said -- "Bad shot, dead people don't sue."
I thought estates could and heirs could (in addition to possibly the government, too [notwithstanding current prosecutor])...
Regards,
Star Traveler
To: Lexington Green
You said -- "Note to self - make sure they're dead"
Problem with that is that you can't cross-examine the dead...
Regards,
Star Traveler
To: Star Traveler
I thought estates could and heirs could (in addition to possibly the government, too [notwithstanding current prosecutor])... But if the bad guy is no longer around, you're the only witness.
Anyone one who breaks into my home will never be able to sue with 4 or 5 44 magnum rounds in his chest.
To: FlingWingFlyer
This crap is another example of why we have too many lawyers.
I don't believe this lawsuit should get past the preliminary hearing but you never know these days.
12
posted on
09/23/2006 10:29:14 AM PDT
by
volunbeer
(Pelosi)
To: Star Traveler
Heirs would not be in the house when the dead guy was shot. They can offer no evidence or testimony as of what transpired.
13
posted on
09/23/2006 10:29:22 AM PDT
by
Bob Mc
To: kiriath_jearim
Insufficient Gun Control...
With adequate GUN CONTROL, the perp would be dead and incapable of pressing any claim...
Double and Triple taps should be SOP.
Multiple shots -- even emptying the magazine, supports the justification of FEAR for one's life.
Memorize the justification: "I was in fear for my life and the safety of my family"...
Semper Fi
14
posted on
09/23/2006 10:29:57 AM PDT
by
river rat
(You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
To: Rum Tum Tugger
And if the dead man is clutching a butcher knife from the kitchen it's definitely self-defense.
15
posted on
09/23/2006 10:30:20 AM PDT
by
baltoga
To: Rum Tum Tugger
"Anyone one who breaks into my home will never be able to sue with 4 or 5 44 magnum rounds in his chest."
Make those 4 44 magnum hollow points and all you'd have left is two legs and a head with arms!
16
posted on
09/23/2006 10:31:02 AM PDT
by
poobear
(Political Left, continually accusing their foes of what THEY themselves do every day.)
To: kiriath_jearim
17
posted on
09/23/2006 10:34:44 AM PDT
by
FFIGHTER
(Character Matters!)
To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
"Why'd you shoot him 44 times?"
"Ran outta ammo."
18
posted on
09/23/2006 10:34:56 AM PDT
by
Lonesome in Massachussets
(The hallmark of a crackpot conspiracy theory is that it expands to include countervailing evidence.)
To: kiriath_jearim
The homeowner should demand a jury trial.
19
posted on
09/23/2006 10:36:09 AM PDT
by
SuziQ
To: Pride in the USA
The Rock County district attorney believed Rainiero acted in self-defense and never pursued charges against him. Weren't we just talking about this scenario? I'm still guessing that since we never hear the outcomes of these civil travesties that most, or all, get thrown out of court.
20
posted on
09/23/2006 10:36:39 AM PDT
by
lonevoice
(Vast Right Wing Pajama Party)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-70 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson