Homeowner Arrested for Shooting a Burglar

[Carborendum]

This is California justice, folks.  

Oakland homeowner arrested after fatally shooting burglary suspect (ktvu.com)

[NeuroTypical]

Heh - I try not to confuse getting arrested with "justice".  

No matter what state you live in, if you use lawful deadly force to defend yourself, you should assume you'll be at least detained, and quite possibly arrested, by the police.  If the evidence is overwhelmingly on your side and you have everything going for you, it might be a short detention or arrest.

Depending on the laws in your state/county/city, and the politics and temperament of your DA, you may or may not be charged.   May or may not be tried, may or may not be convicted, the sentence may be light or severe.   

And then after all that, there are good odds you'll be sued civilly by the person or next of kin for violations of civil rights.   The word "ambulance chaser" doesn't apply to all lawyers, but there are absolutely lawyers who read the news and then offer services on a contingency basis, hoping to sweat a payment out of you.  

 

 

[LDSGator]

6 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

No matter what state you live in, if you use lawful deadly force to defend yourself, you should assume you'll be at least detained, and quite possibly arrested, by the police. 

Yes, exactly, and that’s totally understandable on the cops side. All they see is a corpse and you with a gun. Maybe you blew the guy away for no reason. They can’t just take your word for it. 

[Carborendum]

26 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

No matter what state you live in, if you use lawful deadly force to defend yourself, you should assume you'll be at least detained, and quite possibly arrested, by the police.  If the evidence is overwhelmingly on your side and you have everything going for you, it might be a short detention or arrest.

I hear a LOT of cases in Texas where self-defense shootings happen all the time.  Unless they come across something that would implicate the shooter, they most commonly just leave the self-defense citizen alone.

I've been very impressed by the police in the Houston area.  They have consistently been in favor of the clear assumption of innocence on the part of the self-defending citizen without some really clear indication that something was afoot.

The Castle Doctrine is alive and well.

And the authorities have no desire to discourage private property owners from exercising their rights against trespassers.

Edited June 17, 2024 by Carborendum

[NeuroTypical]

I get it Carb.  There's the news we see that makes us say "yeah, that's how it should be", and the news that makes us say "that's plain wrong".   There are absolutely, positively differences in the laws, political climate, and cultural opinions of Cali and Texas on this issue.   I am not defending Oakland.  I am approaching the matter from the rational perspective of someone invested in personal defense.  That rational perspective tells me that in the aftermath of the defensive use of a firearm, there'll be 4 things that I will need to deal with to one extent or another:

1. Police response, which will usually result in at least a detainment, possibly an arrest. 
2. Criminal stuff, which will involve a DA, maybe a grand jury.  
3. Civil stuff, which will involve lawyers and next of kin claiming they're the victim.
4. The impact on normal life, job, peer group, loved ones, as everyone deals with the news in their own way.

 

I see the Oakland homeowner is free:
https://www.mercurynews.com/2024/06/14/77-year-old-oakland-homeowner-released-from-jail-without-being-charged-in-shooting-death-of-suspected-burglar/

So for that person, 1 is done.  2 is in process.  They released him while the DA is still looking into things.  Even if the DA never charges him, ten bucks says he'll get sued civilly and it'll never make the news.  Another ten bucks says he'll have some neighbors, friends, peers, even family members that go negative on him because of what he did.  We can stomp our feet and yell in outrage things like "they shouldn't treat him any differently, he didn't do anything wrong!"  That reaction, and a nickel, is worth the nickel.  People will be people, and do people things.

 

 

55 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

The Castle Doctrine is alive and well.

That's good, and also true just about everywhere, including California:

 

Edited June 17, 2024 by NeuroTypical

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

I see the Oakland homeowner is free:
https://www.mercurynews.com/2024/06/14/77-year-old-oakland-homeowner-released-from-jail-without-being-charged-in-shooting-death-of-suspected-burglar/

Well that is good to hear.

Quote

“I find it very troubling that the police would arrest someone because they didn’t make a statement,” said Mathew Martinez, an East Bay defense attorney who previously spent 13 years as a prosecutor in Merced County. “You have a Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate yourself. And the fact that you exercise that right doesn’t seem like a reasonable basis to arrest somebody.”

Daniel Horowitz, a Lafayette-based defense attorney, pilloried the police department’s explanation. He and other attorneys in the Bay Area stressed that police “have to articulate facts” for why they believe someone committed a crime, rather than let someone’s silence fill in the gaps.

“It’s really incredible to arrest someone, just simply because there’s someone dead in your yard,” Horowitz said. “If there’s just somebody on your property, and you have a gun and you shoot them, that’s not sufficient to arrest them. It just isn’t.”

This is NOT good to hear.

This is the kind of thing that I really don't like from the police.  They arrest without probable cause.  And specifically because they invoke the 5th. 

Invoking your right to silence cannot be used as PC or RAS per SCOTUS for over 50 years.  Yet police continue to use it to arrest people.

Some people sue.  And some succeed.  But I doubt they'd get anywhere in California.

Edited June 17, 2024 by Carborendum