Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: camle
Hubby shouldn't have gotten drunk and gone after the guy on his own land. One mistake compounding another...

And yes, I'd kill someone trying to get in my wife's pants. I just wouldn't get liquored up and go after them while they were at home.

73 posted on 10/11/2012 7:06:30 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]


To: Dead Corpse
He was in the car with her ~ presumably she and her hubby owned the car so the vic ends up having the Castle Doctrine on his side ~ and he's protecting his stuff.

Hmmmmm

Part of the idea behind the castle doctrine is that a person should be allowed to peaceably hold and protect their own stuff ~ and what you look for is that you were there at home, or in your car, or with your stuff (front yard, barn, wherever) lawfully, and some dude comes along and does some unlawful stuff in or on your property ~ that is, you didn't invite him and he didn't have your permission to BE THERE so you can even pursue him down the road and thrash or kill him!

Not knowing just how far Montana went with this off-premises idea, but if they went the whole way the husband was fully justified in chasing this kid down and doing bad stuff to him. Just because he fled to his own home really shouldn't defend him against the husband's efforts to protect his own stuff.

I don't think this one is over ~ but some lawyer is going to make a lot of money on the deal, possibly even from the local jurisdiction's taxpayers if the prosecutor holds firm on his idea that there's no prosecution needed.

Wonder how often the prosecutor gets into this sort of indiscretion himself ~

121 posted on 10/11/2012 12:18:09 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson