What's new
By:
Filters

A good day in Oakland

Problem is CA will bust the home owner for shooting someone outside the home. It's only "self defense" when they come into the home. That's how I understand the law, now if it was Texas.... no issue at all. Still fuck thieves
 
welndmn said:
Also, who hears gun shots in Oakland and calls the police? It's normal.
Click to expand...
When I lived there I was watching tv about 9 at night and someone did a drive by on our street. Full auto emptied the clip. Close enough that I instinctually hit the deck. Brass everywhere in front of the house

Never even crossed my mind to call the cops. They came by eventually anyway
 
When my brothers super duty was stolen a couple years ago. The local tow yard said that a average of 450 cars were stolen a week in the Oakland area. They were definitely making loot but still not worth it to me. Multiple super duties were stuck in the yard due to being involved in a crime.
 
Sluggy said:
Problem is CA will bust the home owner for shooting someone outside the home. It's only "self defense" when they come into the home. That's how I understand the law, now if it was Texas.... no issue at all. Still fuck thieves
Click to expand...
Not true.

The law states the home owner has a right to defense the moment the perp gains entry to the home, but does not actually have to enter the home.
For instance, breaking the sliding glass window presents an opportunity for entry and at that moment it's a good shoot. Cops show up, bad guys is dead outside the house, all good.
archive.redding.com

Intruder shooting appears justified; Redding woman, 66, killed man, 37, prosecutors say

A 66-year-old woman who shot and killed an intruder early Friday morning in south Redding after he tried to break into her home appears to have been justified, prosecutors say.
archive.redding.com archive.redding.com
 
Bonanza what's the rules of self defense for your yard compared to defending your home?

Just want to clarify what I was always told.
 
Home robbery gone wrong? Wtf is wrong with these reporters? That went as planned. Well done.
 
Sluggy said:
Bonanza what's the rules of self defense for your yard compared to defending your home?

Just want to clarify what I was always told.
Click to expand...

Here's the jury instruction for self defense in your own home. Sometimes called the castle doctrine or similar.

The law presumes that the defendant reasonably feared imminent death
or great bodily injury to (himself/herself)[, or to a member of (his/her)
family or household,] if:
1. An intruder unlawfully and forcibly (entered/ [or] was entering)
the defendant’s home;
2. The defendant knew [or reasonably believed] that an intruder
unlawfully and forcibly (entered/ [or] was entering) the
defendant’s home;
3. The intruder was not a member of the defendant’s household or
family;
AND
4. The defendant used force intended to or likely to cause death or
great bodily injury to the intruder inside the home.
[Great bodily injury means significant or substantial physical injury. It is
an injury that is greater than minor or moderate harm.]
The People have the burden of overcoming this presumption. This means
that the People must prove that the defendant did not have a reasonable
fear of imminent death or injury to (himself/herself)[, or to a member of
his or her family or household,] when (he/she) used force against the
intruder. If the People have not met this burden, you must find the
defendant reasonably feared death or injury to (himself/herself)[, or to a
member of his or her family or household].

So take note of how this is written. This isn't a "someone you don't know is in your house so you have a license to kill". Self defense is a broad legal umbrella, a term which is also litigated more than (anecdotally) anything else in criminal law. This is also largely due to the fact that prosecutors, praise be upon them, have to DISPROVE a violent act was not in self-defense. It's quite a challenge. Compare that, for example, to an affirmative defense. I'll explain.

Affirmative defenses are things the defense has the burden to prove, but if they do, amounts to a complete legal defense. So if I have to prove A, B, and C to get a guilty verdict, if the defense proves X, they win even if I've proved A, B, and C. But for many violent crimes, I also have to prove that X didn't happen. So I have to prove A, B, C, and ~X. It's easier to deal with affirmative defenses because the burden shifts to the defendant, and it's also one less thing I have to prove. This becomes much more of an issue when dealing with what and how to instruct the jury.

So let's circle back to the original hypo of the lawn. If someone is being charged with a homicide (homeowner), it's likely going to be a murder. Murder doesn't technically require me to prove it wasn't in self defense, but it does require me to prove there was no excuse or justification. So practically, I do have to prove lack of self defense, and more. Murder can be reduced if, for instance, you can prove an excuse like being enraged such that you couldn't reflect on your actions. Another justification is.... you guess it- self defense.

So if you blast someone away in your front yard, is there an excuse or justification for it? The law provides the "castle doctrine" presumption above. But like all presumptions, it can be rebutted. Intruder breaks in and flees? No you can't blast him in the back as he runs away. Or can you? Can you persuade a jury you still imminently feared for your life?

For someone being in your yard, legally referred to as the "curtilage" of your home, you don't have the protection of the presumption above. Normal self defense would apply. But, it isn't "normal" there, is it? What about your garage, is that part of your home? (Yes it is). Driveway? (No).

There is seldom going to be a concrete yes/no black/white answer to these things. They are very fact driven. But if I had to make a generalization, even in CA, if some rando is in your house, fire away and don't let him make it outside. I wouldn't care if you shot someone 20 times in the back inside your house, and 20 more times once he's on the ground-- I call that fair game. But outside running away.... eesh.

Edit- watched the video. From what I gather, homies show up in homie-mobile (G37), hope the fence, and approach home. HO shoots and kills. While the legal presumption of self defense in the home wouldn't apply, there is a strong self defense argument anyway. Jumping fence, stranger, approaching home. All of this, to a reasonable person, indicates an immediate danger. If those are the facts, which they may or may not be, I'd lean towards not charging if that case came to me. I would write "lack of confidence in ability to persuade jury BARD that self defense did not apply."

Recall, for prosecutors there is an ethical duty not to charge someone unless you are convinced you can convince a jury BARD that you can meet the elements and overcome any defenses.
 
Last edited:
So one of the deads had a crowbar, one of the deads had a replica handgun, and third may have been unarmed and he held her at gunpoint until police arrived?

I'm going to say he'll be cleared of the murder charges, as it was self-defense, but he'll be charged being in possession of a stolen handgun. Not sure re: the holding the last one at gunpoint.
 
Bonanza said:
hope the fence, and approach home. HO shoots and kills. While the legal presumption of self defense in the home wouldn't apply, there is a strong self defense argument anyway. Jumping fence, stranger, approaching home. All of this, to a reasonable person, indicates an immediate danger.
Click to expand...
Does it make any difference if the home owner remains inside the home or steps out to confront the threat before it reaches his family?

Derail: What about signs, does any posted signage ever play a role in a case? "warning, keep out. Pit bull on property. No trespass."
Is having any kind of sign going to help or hurt a person in a court room?
 
Was thinking a good day in Oakland looked like this
1718721534229.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh