Vigilant gun owner defends home from intruder!

[emre]

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/21247494/detail.html

[Chanchu]

http://www.examiner.com/x-18149-SelfDef ... me-invader

http://www.examiner.com/x-18149-SelfDef ... lf-defense

http://www.examiner.com/x-18149-SelfDef ... tore-owner

[Michael]

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/21247494/detail.html

Cold feet?

[Michael]

http://www.examiner.com/x-18149-SelfDefense-Examiner~y2009m10d4-Armed-NC-man-defends-himself-against-revengeseeking-home-invader

http://www.examiner.com/x-18149-SelfDef ... lf-defense

http://www.examiner.com/x-18149-SelfDef ... tore-owner

After reading these articles, I will apparently have to preface everything I say in the future with, "I took out my self defense gun..."

[Dmitri]

That's just so sad. I really feel for the old man... What a horrible situation.

Cold feet?

what do you mean?

[Michael]

Possibility that he shot her on purpose because he didn't really want to get married. I think people know when their loved ones are coming into their house. Without explanation about why you would shoot anyone without some kind of verbal warning, perhaps because the police didn't provide the info., it doesn't make sense that he would fire the gun without recognizing his fiance. Unless he's off his rocker somehow.

Anyway, could have been accidental, but just as likely done on purpose.

[Dmitri]

No chance. Did you read the article, he was "sobbing loudly" throughout the 911 call.

'I haven’t seen anything to suggest there were any domestic problems. I’ve been told they were a great couple. The gentleman is very distraught.'

(source)




This is the saddest damn thing ever...

RIP and all the very best to the man... he's got one hell of a horrible thing to live with now.

[Steve James]

It's possible. But, it's interesting that people would prefer to think that a guy would kill his fiancee and claim it was an accident, rather than go through with the wedding. It is possible, but ... "I don't love you any more" seems so much simpler, or just don't show up.

If it was an accident --and it wouldn't be the first-- I feel sorry for the guy. I can see how someone can get startled in their home by a family member. If he did it on purpose, he should be punished. Now, how to prove he did it intentionally is another thing. They'll need a good motive. They weren't married, so insurance and property might not be issues. If there was a young hoochie on the side, that gives him even less motive. If they've had a history of violence or a big argument recently, that'd be a start.

[Harvey]

I doubt that when you reach your 60's you'd be so insecure that you couldn't man up about stuff like that. It does sound like a terrible accidnet, feel sorry for the dude.

[dragontigerpalm]

I don't know why he ever fired the gun. He acquired and shot an unidentified target yet he wasn't under attack, returning fire or even threatened physically or verbally. I wouldn't call that an accident. IMO that was completely reckless with a fatal result.

[Dmitri]

IMO that was completely reckless with a fatal result.

Agreed.

[klonk]

Rule Four. Sad.

http://www.squidoo.com/gunsafety

[roger hao]

As for motive - it is the opposite of what we have been
led to believe by TV and movies. Motive is used to determine suspects
but is not an element in a murder trial. Having served as a juror on a capital
murder trial the judge directly instructed that motive is not a point to be proven
in capital murder.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

would you agree that lack of motive would have some weight though?

[Steve James]

I've never served on a capital murder trial, but I just got through serving on a bribery case. It boiled down to a "he says -she says" case. I.e., a cop said that a storeowner had tried to bribe him ... because he had caught her peddling bootleg dvds. There was no evidence for the bribery except cash the officer said was offered him. The prosecutor stressed that the reason for the bribe was the crime that had been committed. There were two charges; the judge didn't instruct us to ignore the bribe. But, we found that there wasn't enough evidence to convict on that charge. But, the woman was still fined for the bootlegs.

Anyway, afaik, motive is not a charge, nor a criminal offense --except in conspiracy cases. Planning to commit a murder is also against the law, as we've seen in many "sting" operations. In this case, however, if the guy is charged --and he will if it can be shown that he intentionally shot his wife-- then, his motives for that intention will be addressed, even if they aren't evidence Otoh, he could have every reason to kill her, but not have intended to do so.