It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Miami woman killed a teen burglar as he fled her home, police say. Should she be charged?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: PhantomOrion
a reply to: intrptr

It's really a shame. The young should never die before their time.

If I were in the woman's shoes, it would be tempting to take the law into my own hands. After all, how dare they enter my home. Wish there was more information about what happened in the home when she confronted the boy. I see her actions being more emotionally-based. She didn't have to kill him. And she did disobey the police who told her not to enter the home. She may see some consequences.

I agree. She ran home and forced whatever confrontation there was to a head, because she 'was tired of it'. Someone else said thats second degree murder… seconding that.




posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: PhantomOrion
a reply to: intrptr

It's really a shame. The young should never die before their time.

If I were in the woman's shoes, it would be tempting to take the law into my own hands. After all, how dare they enter my home. Wish there was more information about what happened in the home when she confronted the boy. I see her actions being more emotionally-based. She didn't have to kill him. And she did disobey the police who told her not to enter the home. She may see some consequences.



I have to take issue with your belief about the young. A criminal is a criminal no matter the age. And i don trecall anything being said about the cops telling her to not pursue. Are you sure your not adding from Travon martin and zimmerman there?

Its her house she has the right to not retreat in her own house or property.

And really folks... this isnt surprising given th elocation its LIBERTY CITY. the GTA creators choose the name as well because of its reputation id bet.



so by your logic a 5 year old who kills another 5 year old while playing or didnt realize what killing is and just killed someone, or a toddler shoots a parent, or a 12 year old steals candy from a local shop.

do you think children, young ADOLESCENTS have the same mind capacity as an adult. there's a reason why there are age limits and restrictions to vote, open bank accounts, take driving tests. its something evolution has worked out for years for us. a person is young so are their critical thinking abilities, as they develop they develop reasoning and more capacitive critical faculties.
---
who knows what that kid was going to take, probably something trivial. its safe to assume her house wasnt a mansion and appeared lucrative to robbers.

what if he only took some food because he was starving... this is where the critical thinking fails in certain age brackets.
how many teens can balance a checkbook or understand moral authorities of the law... how many teens do stupid things. i know i did as a teen. now i look back an realize how idiotic some of those things were, while in my mind those things werent stupid at the time. simply because i was young and only saw things from that one perspective...


this shows the mind capacity of most ats users, in some cases they scream for the law to be enforced, but here she had a valid reason to kill heh... the woman killed a person after she made assumptions in her mind. she murdered a person running away, a person who didnt try to take her life.

and you libertycity guess is as ignorant as ... you pick. you say 'really folks' 'its not suprising... blah blah' then add 'id bet'... so that entire sentence is based on nothing. and btw thats not why lib city was called what it was. look it up yourself.
ill refrain from calling the name that this post made you sound like because of ATS policies.


I didnt call for toddlers or children to be killed so way to assume something buddy. Children can be taught but when youre past the age 5 you should know that stealing is wrong.

Also IF the criminal was on her property she didnt know if he could had stopped and came back to kill her before running off. That has happenned before i am quite sure.

OH it was a teenager who was killed. SO WHAT? If youre man enough to do a break in you are man enough to Die in th e comission of said crime. Youre just mad at anyone who owns a firearm no matter what.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

I agree w/both points. Still have not said (unless I missed it) if the deceased had any type of weapon on his person?

Thanks for posting




posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: odzeandennz

All I read was a bunch of excuses. As long as ADULTS who should be RESPONSIBLE continue to excuse the actions of criminals under the guise of their "youth" we will continue to see behaviors like his. You're giving people like this excuses for why it is understandable to be a crook instead of holding them accountable and using common sense. His family clearly also made excuses for him, and maybe had been his whole life. They're a part of the reason he got himself killed too, if they condoned his actions because "what else ya gonna do." People need to stop defending criminal behavior. There are always consequences for actions; his criminal behavior is what got him killed. Had he been working a real job instead of sneaking around peoples homes and taking what he had no right to touch, this wouldn't have happened.

Also "what if he took some food because starving" really? What if he did? Do tell me. How does that justify breaking in and taking someone elses food? He should've asked! You do NOT STEAL. You do not INVADE A HOME. What if he had asked, and she would have given him food? Do you see how pointless what-ifs are? At his age, he knew that what he was doing is wrong why else do it when the person is gone.
edit on 17-3-2016 by JustAnObservation because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

NO matter. She went home and tried to stop a robbery. Same principle applies to a store owner you have the right to defend your property. You always assume the criminal is armed these days.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: ReadLeader

I've got a 6 inch scar on my left forearm because a 15 year old decided that he wanted the cartons of cigarettes in a bag that I was carrying. He came up behind me, slashed my arm, and tried to grab the bag. I slugged him and he hit his head off a post supporting the canopy of the convenience store. The police came and we both ended up at the hospital. His mother came in demanding to know who was going to pay the hospital bill. When she was told that I hit her son, she went off on me demanding that I drop the charges against her son. I told her that I planned on pressing every charge that the police could come up with. She said that she was going to sue me because I was over twice the size of her son. I told her that was why I was pressing charges. If he was stupid enough to try to take me on, what would he have done with an elderly person? I told her that she was lucky that her son was alive. When she asked why, I told her to ask the police officer what he had in the trunk of his car? The officer told her that my 9mm pistol was in the trunk and I would have been justified in shooting her son. That was the last I heard of it. The DA told me that I didn't need to press charges because of her son's prior record. By the way the kid was white.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: ReadLeader
a reply to: intrptr

I agree w/both points. Still have not said (unless I missed it) if the deceased had any type of weapon on his person?

Thanks for posting



Castle doctrine and stand your ground. DOnt matter if he was shot in the back if she was in fear of him turning around.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: intrptr

NO matter. She went home and tried to stop a robbery. Same principle applies to a store owner you have the right to defend your property. You always assume the criminal is armed these days.

She went home to try and stop a burglary, not a robbery. Big difference between burglary and robbery in the eyes of the law.

A burglary is usually defined as when someone enters a property illegally for the purposes of theft while owners are away.

Robbery is usually confrontational like in a store or home when people are there.

Big difference in jail time, too.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Its a robbery IF they are home and to have SHOT HIM it was a ROBBERY.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz

so by your logic a 5 year old who kills another 5 year old while playing or didnt realize what killing is and just killed someone, or a toddler shoots a parent, or a 12 year old steals candy from a local shop.

do you think children, young ADOLESCENTS have the same mind capacity as an adult. there's a reason why there are age limits and restrictions to vote, open bank accounts, take driving tests. its something evolution has worked out for years for us. a person is young so are their critical thinking abilities, as they develop they develop reasoning and more capacitive critical faculties.
---
who knows what that kid was going to take, probably something trivial. its safe to assume her house wasnt a mansion and appeared lucrative to robbers.

what if he only took some food because he was starving... this is where the critical thinking fails in certain age brackets.
how many teens can balance a checkbook or understand moral authorities of the law... how many teens do stupid things. i know i did as a teen. now i look back an realize how idiotic some of those things were, while in my mind those things werent stupid at the time. simply because i was young and only saw things from that one perspective...


this shows the mind capacity of most ats users, in some cases they scream for the law to be enforced, but here she had a valid reason to kill heh... the woman killed a person after she made assumptions in her mind. she murdered a person running away, a person who didnt try to take her life.

and you libertycity guess is as ignorant as ... you pick. you say 'really folks' 'its not suprising... blah blah' then add 'id bet'... so that entire sentence is based on nothing. and btw thats not why lib city was called what it was. look it up yourself.
ill refrain from calling the name that this post made you sound like because of ATS policies.

Ok. Why does it matter whether or not the criminal knew what he was doing, understood whether it was right or wrong, or what his motivations are? It really doesn't. That's the criminal's problem, not the homeowner's.
edit on 3/17/16 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: JustAnObservation
a reply to: PhantomOrion

The young shouldn't be breaking into peoples homes and committing crimes, hastening their own demise. None of this would have happened had this guy followed simple societal standards and laws. Period. The true shame is the behavior of the criminal in this case and that there are those who will defend it, thus allowing for this to continue. With his death we did not exactly lose an outstanding citizen or someone who was going to contribute anything to our society, only take from and leech off of others, if his behavior is any indication.


I absolutely agree with you. Which is why its a shame. I was merely commenting on the woman in the story in answer to the post. But I do agree. He put himself in that position and unfortunately the co sequence of that was death. Perhaps it did not have to go there, but it happened.

U derstandably the family is upset but they also need to accept that their kid made poor choices. Anyone that even thinks about doing the same thing and burglarizing someone elses home needs to consider the foolishness they are committing.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ReadLeader

Dunno, she shot him in the back as he fled. He wasn't an imminent threat to her life at that point.

Not prosecuting sends a message to homeowners.

Hey, just bang away.

Its Miami. Treyvon Martin was shot after he fled by George Zimmerman who got away with it.



Not shooting the criminal sends the message they have more rights than the home owner.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: intrptr

Its a robbery IF they are home and to have SHOT HIM it was a ROBBERY.



according to police, fatally shooting a teenager as he fled her house, even as officers were on their way to help?

You changed your position. As he fled is different than what you say, but I wasn't there either. According to police he was trying to get away, not harm her. Taking lives is an imminent threat thing for rational people. You have to be in fear of your life, not your stuff.

She had cameras installed, perhaps we can get a look.

Regardless, she wasn't already home, she raced home to shoot the guy. Thats different than a robbery, being home when they break in…
What she saw on the camera was a burglary, turned into a robbery because she went home.
edit on 17-3-2016 by intrptr because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-3-2016 by intrptr because: additional



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: PhantomOrion

originally posted by: JustAnObservation
a reply to: PhantomOrion

The young shouldn't be breaking into peoples homes and committing crimes, hastening their own demise. None of this would have happened had this guy followed simple societal standards and laws. Period. The true shame is the behavior of the criminal in this case and that there are those who will defend it, thus allowing for this to continue. With his death we did not exactly lose an outstanding citizen or someone who was going to contribute anything to our society, only take from and leech off of others, if his behavior is any indication.


I absolutely agree with you. Which is why its a shame. I was merely commenting on the woman in the story in answer to the post. But I do agree. He put himself in that position and unfortunately the co sequence of that was death. Perhaps it did not have to go there, but it happened.

U derstandably the family is upset but they also need to accept that their kid made poor choices. Anyone that even thinks about doing the same thing and burglarizing someone elses home needs to consider the foolishness they are committing.


I apologize for misunderstanding in that case! I didn't mean to get all frothy if it came across that way, but these situations deeply anger and sadden me as I feel not enough is being done to discourage young adults from this lifestyle of crime. People will so often defend it and make excuses, which negatively impacts the mindset of these younger adults, leading them to think it is ok and that they are the victims rather than the perpetrator. Accountability would be a huge step rather than defending them; the adults who do should be ashamed of the message they are sending. They should know better and teach sense. And I agree, it is tragic for the family. Hopefully they take the lesson here to heart and change their stance on burglary being an acceptable occupation to support an education, so that they do not suffer more losses within the family. It is a tragic situation, but they got themselves there.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: ReadLeader

She should be charged....Without reading your entire op but familiar with this...she may be in deep crap. She was not in fear for her life, he was not life-threatening anyone else...he wasnt running at or towards her...he was running away...as you said AWAY.

That equals shooting one in the back. Doesnt matter if they had your jewelry box under their arm of your car's battery. The laws are VERY specific. He was running away, no threat to her or anyone...and as long as a criminal is running AWAY...you have no right to "self-defense"...which it wasnt.

She could be charged with murder, because...licensed or not...he was no threat...and was leaving, running, driving away...whatever...that is not by any means "self-defense".

I think shes in trouble now....
edit on 17-3-2016 by mysterioustranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: JustAnObservation

No worries here. Just wanted to clarify my stanceand I am fully in agreement. It frustrates me as well.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: mysterioustranger

Me thinks she m a y be charged; again, lets see what the counsel decides. As we have read ALOT of factors on this one, alot of great posts and info as well!!!

Thanks for posting!





posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: ReadLeader

I consider myself with this. I couldnt shoot someone running away...even if they had my stuff. Now...IF they were running and firing a weapon at me....that may be different. But, the law on self defense is just that..."in self defense"

And that wasnt. Someone steals from you and you catch them..you cant just shoot them...unless they were definitely armed and you were in fear for yours or someone else life.

I wouldnt want to go to prison because I shot and killed someone running away from me and 2 doors down.

Did you know if we come home and see someone inside...we cant go in and shoot them? Not if you were outside...because you/me/us have to chance to not confront them...therefore-not self defense.

It would be you going in to your home, confronting them and killing them. Thats murder. Now if they come INTO your house while you are INSIDE...yes you can shoot to kill. Because its a reasonable assumption that youre in fear for your life.

Some criteria in Michigan is home invasion, rape, car jacking or fear of deadly assault against you or someone else.

Its a heavy responsibility I carry while carrying concealed...Thanks
edit on 17-3-2016 by mysterioustranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: mysterioustranger

Not a day goes by that I DO NOT contemplate different scenarios whilst commuting to and from work with my pocket rocket in my KYDEX.

Judgement and thought process have to go into account on EVERY single situation. This is where most CC holders that get in trouble go wrong. Ive seen it in person multiple times; most cases, there was no need to even un-holster..sadly



Thanks for posting Myst!




posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: ReadLeader

You bet. Thanks! Like minds think alike. I think the whole gun control debate is misunderstood. Its more how not to use firearms we legally carry.

Thanks for responding....MS



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join