Posted on 10/23/2007 7:11:34 PM PDT by sdk7x7
Police say a Putnam County homeowner shot and killed a man who he thought was trying to break into his home while his family slept. State police charged Peter Guerriero, of Putnam Lake, with manslaughter Monday in the death of 32-year-old David Schachnow, of Southeast. They say the 42-year-old Guerriero shot Schachnow in front of his house early that morning on a walkway that leads up to the front door and a deck. Schachnow was pronounced dead at 3:58 a.m. at a local hospital. State Police Capt. Keith Corlett says that it does not appear that Guerriero intentionally caused Schachnow's death, "but recklessly did it." Guerriero's attorney refused to comment on the charges.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
This is the law in several states but not all of them (for lurkers). There is no duty to retreat in numerous states.
Words to live by: I was in fear for my life.
“He just called the police and they hauled him off.”
How long was the response time?
In our neck of the woods “RonDellumsvill” the guy would have been clean and sober before the response!
Amen. IN law says citizens are not required to retreat and can use lethal force to defend themselves in their residence, cars and/or place of employment. There is no obligation to retreat. If a perp enters or attempts to enter your house in this state, they are presumed a threat to your life and you have the right to defend yourself and your family with lethal force.
There are obviously some acceptions and issue by issue it is always investigated.
Another was repo'ing his car in front of his house, shot the repo man dead. No charge. If you want to repo my car, knock on the door.
In Texas, if its after dark, you can protect your life AND PROPERTY. If its daylight, you must fear for your life.
I understand that and I have gotten lost driving a few times and wandered into a strange neighborhood but still, getting lost and accidentally wandering into someone’s property shouldn’t be a death sentence.
In Texas the authorities send such cases to the Grand Jury without recommended charges (basically without charges). The Grand Jury almost always returns a "No Bill" which clears the defender of any criminal charges, and helps in any related civil trial.
But then in Texas deadly force is specifically justified to protect property, as well as life and limb, of self, or others. In defense of self, there is no duty to retreat, which until recently only applied on ones own property or property under one's control. Now it applies everywhere. In defense of property there are more limitations in the law, but they usually are broadly interpreted in favor of the defender.
Don't bet on it. Especially don't bet your life on it.
Texas Penal Code on Deadly Force for Protection of Property
Excerpt:
§ 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
...
§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
The "during the nighttime" limitation only applies to "Theft" and "criminal mischief", it does not apply to burglary, arson or a number of other "property" crimes. You need not fear for your life, but basically the laws cover situations where you *should*.
Some states treat your vehicle as your household.
That being New York, I doubt it.
"Your honor, I was in fear of my life.
His honor,"so, you shot him 7 times?"
Victim,"I wasn't counting. I just pulled the trigger until I was no longer in fear for my life."
End of discussion.
No matter where you are, being in fear of your life is the best reason to use lethal force. Just be sure you were, and can prove, you were in fear of your life. The location is secondary.
>we were taught that if you caught someone IN your house, and if you had a means of leaving that house, then that was the option you needed to take. Even if you feel threatened, if you can leave, you must leave and not use force. If he was armed but hadn't attacked you, you still had a legal requirement to leave that house.<
Are you saying that one must abandon his/her family?
Not in texas...you can use deadly force to protect property.
What we have here...is a clear violation of the 14th amendment and the equal protection under law clause...
The new yorker should have the same rights as the texan...
*grin*
Yes, it's the victim's obligation to retreat in Massachusetts.
Even if a blood-soaked naked maniac holding his erect penis in one hand and a chainsaw in the other is pursuing you with the intent to hack you and your family into fish bait, it's the home owner's duty in most of New England to flee their dwelling -- potentially leaving a family member behind to a grisly end.
... and you know how different the laws are in the great state of Nevada.
As far as 'breaking and entering' is concerned, the following states hold 'Castle Doctrine' to be the law:
* Alabama
* Alaska
* Arizona
* Connecticut
* Florida
* Hawaii
* Idaho
* Illinois
* Indiana
* Kansas
* Kentucky
* Louisiana
* Maine
* Massachusetts
* Michigan
* Minnesota
* Mississippi
* Missouri
* Montana
* Nevada
* North Carolina
* Pennsylvania
* Rhode Island
* Texas
* Tennessee
* Utah
In none of those states have you got a duty to retreat from property crime of 'breaking and entering' meaning that you may settle the issue yourself up to and including the use of deadly force in order to prevent the crime.
Where I live, deadly force is justified simply by the actor committing a violent felony on private property or against a person travelling in a vehicle anywhere in the state.
"Section 8A. In the prosecution of a person who is an occupant of a dwelling charged with killing or injuring one who was unlawfully in said dwelling, it shall be a defense that the occupant was in his dwelling at the time of the offense and that he acted in the reasonable belief that the person unlawfully in said dwelling was about to inflict great bodily injury or death upon said occupant or upon another person lawfully in said dwelling, and that said occupant used reasonable means to defend himself or such other person lawfully in said dwelling. There shall be no duty on said occupant to retreat from such person unlawfully in said dwelling."
Exactly. That is the old Ted Kennedy "duty to retreat" nonsense. He tried to make it Federal Law at one point essentially telling women if they were in the privacy of their own bedroom and assaulted by a stranger intent on rape, they were required to jump out a window rather than fight or kill the rapist.
Psychologically and tactically the worst possible thing anyone can do is to move from surroundings with which they are intimately familar to unknown surroundings where other assailants may await to strike while the fleeing individual is completely vulnerable.
Fortunately, most States have rediscovered the common law doctrine of "stand your ground" or "castle doctrine" and passed legislation to reinforce it.
Best regards,
Exactly
Make sure you kill them in the house or if you don’t want a mess kill outside and like you said drag in.
That was because he figured the rapist might be a Kennedy!
Need more info
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.