Martinez Smith-Payne - 13 yrs - He Lost 4 Fingers While Playing With Fireworks When He Was 10
Frances Smith-Woods - 'mother'
An attorney I saw interviewed about this story said that Missouri's Castle Doctrine Law applies to "anything with a roof" on your property. Therefore he was not charged for the shooting itself.
So, presume that if his car was a convertible, with the top down, castle does not apply.
“If (McDade) would have come out and said, ‘Get out of here!,’ my son would have ran.”
If you knew him so well, you might have tried telling him it’s not right to rifle through other people’s belongings.
In which case, he wouldn’t have had to ‘ran.’
“... shoot instead of coming out and scaring them or yelling at them... “
Yeah so they can steal more and graduate to home invasion/rape/murder.
Frances Smith-Woods
“why did he just shoot instead of coming out and scaring them or yelling at them?”
Yes, you are such a good mother. I’m sure that would have worked out really well! How about raising a son who stays out of trouble!
Mother: Frances Smith-Woods
Son: Martinez Smith-Payne
He also was sentenced in 2013 in St. Louis County Circuit Court to five years on probation on a felony charge of being more than 12 months in arrears on child support.
...
That shouldn’t prevent you from owning a firearm.
“The shot was fired from a distance of more than 70 feet away, police sources said. “ Good shot with a .380.
Or.
Perhaps your son would have pulled HIS piece and shot the homeonwer dead on the spot.
Yeah. THAT day.
Just ponder that a moment.
so apparently we are allowed to protect ourselves, BUT we WILL be charged with SOMETHING and made a criminal in the process
Martinez Smith-Payne - 13 yrs - He Lost 4 Fingers While Playing With Fireworks When He Was 10
Frances Smith-Woods - 'mother'
She knew her son ... and he was a thief in his heart and that didn’t bother her as much as society not accepting her twisted son and just warning him whenever he exercised the nature she recognized in him. Sorry, mame, you were raising a criminal to prey upon others.
“...but for being a felon in possession of a gun.”
If you’re too dangerous to have a gun, you’re too dangerous to be out of prison. If you’ve served your time, you should be allowed to defend yourself.
The defendant was a fellow stopped on the street by the police. When they asked him to turn out his pockets, a receipt from a gun store fell out. By that time they had run a background screen and it was clear that he was a convicted felon. They asked him where the gun was, and he told the police it was at his home. The police told him to go home, get the gun and bring it to the local precinct house. He did that and was arrested on the spot and charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm.
The jury deliberations were edited down slightly to fit into a 1 hour documentary. It was a slam dunk case, in which the jury ended up returning an acquittal - a perfect example of jury nullification. The defendant was a very poorly educated man of manifestly low IQ. The jury was sympathetic to him, and simply ignored the evidence and the law and acquitted him.
Disgusting.
Moral of story: never live in St Louis
“Therefore he was not charged for the shooting itself.”.........
Those darn felonies keep getting in the way of getting off scot free. Just have to figure a way to get around those.
Felon can’t own guns.
Felon shoots kid.
Kid dies.
Felon goes back to jail.
Pretty simple