Skip to comments.
Accused Burglar Sues Homeowner Who Shot Him
The Milwaukee Journal ^
| 10/01/06
Posted on 10/01/2006 9:28:04 PM PDT by baldeagle390
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101 next last
To: DaveLoneRanger
2
posted on
10/01/2006 9:29:11 PM PDT
by
xrp
(Fox News Channel: MISSING WHITE GIRL NETWORK)
To: baldeagle390
I just learned a lesson. Empty the clip.
3
posted on
10/01/2006 9:30:15 PM PDT
by
blam
To: baldeagle390
It's a good thing that Florida's new castle doctrine law expressly forbids those kinds of suits. Looks like Wisconsin has some cutting and pasting to do. Then a veto to override, a bill to refile, another attempt ...
4
posted on
10/01/2006 9:33:21 PM PDT
by
NonValueAdded
(Treaty Fetishism: "[The] belief that a piece of paper will alter the behavior of thugs." R. Lowry.)
To: baldeagle390
Not surprising.When you consider that the left thinks terrorists should have more rights than we, as citizens, do, who is surprised when they think that criminals should have more rights than victims? It's the propaganda of good=evil and evil=good. Sad state of affairs in the greatest nation on God's green earth.
To: baldeagle390
The unfortunate thing is that the homeowner didn't kill this perp. There have been similar cases and the bad guy usually wins because he is disabled for life and cannot work because of the homeowner's actions.
6
posted on
10/01/2006 9:33:47 PM PDT
by
NY Attitude
(You are responsible for your safety until the arrival of Law Enforcement Officers!)
To: blam
7
posted on
10/01/2006 9:34:15 PM PDT
by
xrp
(Fox News Channel: MISSING WHITE GIRL NETWORK)
To: Joe Brower
To: blam
The criminal shouldn't be able to sue to begin with, but yes, if your life is in danger, don't go for a single shot. If this convict had a gun, he wouldn't have hesitated.
9
posted on
10/01/2006 9:35:21 PM PDT
by
kingu
(No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
To: blam
And never, ever call the police afterward.
To: blam
And put a knife in his hand....
To: blam
If this case isn't thrown out of court the minute the judge calls for order in the court, then something is really screwed with our justice system.
All IMHO, of course.
12
posted on
10/01/2006 9:36:05 PM PDT
by
basil
(Exercise your Second Amendment rights--buy another gun today.)
To: xrp
Not really. If the perp was killed, it's likely his family would file civil suit. You know, for loss of income, loss of consortium, the usual.
13
posted on
10/01/2006 9:37:54 PM PDT
by
Disambiguator
(If the Democrats were a stock, I would short them.)
To: baldeagle390
The Milwaukee County suit claims Rainiero used excessive force to deal with the intruding plaintiff and alleges severe and permanent injuries, relentless pain, and loss of earning capacity. The suit doesn't specify a damage amount. Wrong! The perp is alive! Three shots center of mass and do not use full metal jacket. Might I suggest the fine line if ammunition from Corbon. They make very good stuff.
14
posted on
10/01/2006 9:38:00 PM PDT
by
cpdiii
(Socialism is popular with the ruling class. It gives legitimacy to tyranny and despotism.)
To: baldeagle390
The Milwaukee County suit claims Rainiero used excessive force to deal with the intruding plaintiff and alleges severe and permanent injuries, relentless pain, and loss of earning capacity.
To: Neil E. Wright
16
posted on
10/01/2006 9:39:52 PM PDT
by
trussell
(Work for God...the retirement benefits are eternal!)
To: xrp
"magazine, not a clip"
Obviously a man that knows what a Garand is!
17
posted on
10/01/2006 9:40:21 PM PDT
by
cpdiii
(Socialism is popular with the ruling class. It gives legitimacy to tyranny and despotism.)
To: blam
18
posted on
10/01/2006 9:43:10 PM PDT
by
thoughtomator
(Islam delenda est)
To: baldeagle390
If the case is thrown out, Prochaska can be forced to pay up to $500 of the legal expensesPretty good incentive to try a suit if you're inside. Is the defendant's liability also $500 ? Bet it's not. Like all the apochryphal stories say, shoot to kill.
19
posted on
10/01/2006 9:45:16 PM PDT
by
1066AD
To: kingu
Why can't you counter sue the perp for the mental anguish, loss of consortium (say if the wife doesn't feel safe to have sex in the house), etc that his crime caused.
I do find it funny that he is also claiming loss of future earnings. I imagine the cross examination: "and how many robberies per night did you plan to commit, and what was the average take?"
20
posted on
10/01/2006 9:46:41 PM PDT
by
exblockhead
(HR Block, where customer service means rip off the customer)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101 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