Posted on 01/04/2005 2:29:19 AM PST by kattracks
NEW BEDFORD, Mass. -- A man who shot and killed another man on his property has been indicted for second-degree murder, according to prosecutors. The grand jury indicted Charles D. Chieppa, 56, for the July 17 shooting of 26-year-old Frank Pereira Jr. with a rifle.The fatal shots were fired near Chieppa's property just before dawn. By sunrise, motorists drove past Mr. Pereira's body, honking their horns and shouting in support of the shooting, the Standard-Times of New Bedford reported.
Chieppa, a Vietnam War combat veteran, lived in his parent's old home and largely kept to himself, neighbors said.
The home was next to Alfie's bar, which is known for drug dealing and prostitution. Pereira had snatched a purse from an Alfie's patron just hours before he was shot, police said.
Police had initially said the shooting happened when Chieppa confronted a burglar breaking into his home around 4 a.m. A day later, detectives acknowledged that they were investigating whether Pereira had actually entered the house before Chieppa opened fire.
[snip]
"My son didn't deserve to die the way he did, even if he was trying to break in," said Evelina Salgueiro, the victim's mother. "You don't shoot someone in the back like that. He was shot in the street."
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
The Texas Penal Code provision posted at Post 27 expressly provides for shooting a fleeing suspect.
If u don't mind?I'm inclined to agree w/ your opinion. My law instructor stated in Fl you can only use deadly force(ie gun) when confronted by deadly force (gun,knife,etc).You must also be in imminent fear for your life.A private citizen shooting a fleeing perp is dicey at best. You think that's bad? Even if shooting is justified, perp(or survivors)can take the case to civil court.
Part of the logic for "nighttime" may have to do with the inability to see the full potential danger from the offending actor...to see weapons such as clubs, firearms knives and other such. It daylight, one would have the abilty to determine if deadly force is being directed to you.
In a strange note, during about 1980-84 the state legislature (Texas) required people a duty to retreat from their home if they were in danger. These PC police were kicked out and the law was rescinded to the original theory that one's home is his castle, that one cannot retreat any further than to their home. Forcing a person outside exposes them to more dangers.
I had not known about this until after the fact while golfing with a Judge in Andrews.
Wouldn't be surprised.
That is the state where a prominent politician discovered a pregnant
girlfriend in his sinking car so fled and let the police handle it the next day.
Everything else you say is 100% correct. If you shoot someone on your doorstep and drag him inside, you are a fool and you WILL get caught.
Your remark about property is also true in most places.
However... In Texas, and perhaps a few other states, deadly force may be used to prevent "theft by night." Shoot him a minute before sunrise, it's a no-bill. Shoot him a minute after, and it's 2nd-degreee murder just like this case. Weird. I believe it is based on a Biblical verse or a precept of Roman law; it goes back a very very long way.
-ccm
Since the laws regarding murder, assault etc. are State laws the local ordinance will not give you cover for blowing scum away.
Read post 27.....
By sunrise, motorists drove past Mr. Pereira's body, honking their horns and shouting in support of the shooting, the Standard-Times of New Bedford reported.
---
How come our laws don't reflect the will of the people and the spirit of this countries founding?
Misinterpretation...? By whom?
Why do so many posters not do a bit of simple research...before making blanket declarations? Go to the source..The Texas Department of Public Safety....(see link)and I agree that one should not utilze deadly force unless one fears for one's life. Personally I would not pull the trigger on someone stealing my lawnmomer...
Scroll down to Table VIII.
Even on the Texas frontier, educated men in those days were quite familiar with Greek and Roman history. The men who wrote this law a hundred and fifty years ago probably read the Twelve Tables in the original Latin.
We should have kept this one too:
They could have used Enchanted Rock in the Hill Country.
-ccm
Not I am not being a smart _ss...but when was the last time you had a resonable expectation of getting stolen property back? GRIN...still I personally would not shoot...
If he was shot in the back it's not self-defense. If the shooter wasn't in danger, and didn't give warning and attempt apprehend the perp, then the shooting was wrong.
Lives, even criminal lives, are worth more than property. You have the right to defend property rights, and in many states to use necessary force including deadly force to bring someone to justice who has violated those property rights.
But you don't have the right to take a life just because that person violated your property rights. There is a proper procedure to bring them to justice and let the courts dispense justice. If you exceed what is reasonably necessary to bring them to justice then you are guilty of a crime yourself.
""My son didn't deserve to die the way he did, even if he was trying to break in," said Evelina Salgueiro, the victim's mother. "You don't shoot someone in the back like that. He was shot in the street." "
Yes, he should be. Don't want to get killed, don't try to break into a home.
I will say it over and over, you have far far more to fear from your local DA than you do a criminal.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Remember, they still have to convict him.
Fat chance.
It is not plausible to flee a house if an intruder is in there.
It is either kill or be killed. Attack or be attacked.
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.