Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Elderly man cleared of shooting two intruders, killing one

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    gctest50
    Registered Users Posts: 9,605 ✭✭✭gctest50


    Arsemageddon wrote: »
    Actually they had come down off the meth and had gone to the house to sleep.

    Very reassuring that if you were actually there at the time counting you'd be reading this sorta stuff all the time :

    wasn't that much in this guys system:
    Rudy Eugene, 31, the man who police say horrifically ate a homeless man's face over Memorial Day weekend


  • Options
    #33
    Augme
    Registered Users Posts: 5,294 ✭✭✭Augme


    I'd defend myself if I felt I was in danger. However I can't ever imagine actually wanting to murder someone just because they broke into my house. You'd want to a pretty big scumbag to do that.


  • Options
    #34
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    gctest50 wrote: »
    Very reassuring that if you were actually there at the time counting you'd be reading this sorta stuff all the time :

    The only drug found in Rudy Eugenes system at autopsy was weed.
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/27/medical-examiner-finds-only-marijuana-in-miami-face-chewer-system.html#ixzz1z2Ne6RED


  • Options
    #35
    Baron Kurtz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,262 ✭✭✭Baron Kurtz


    FTA69 wrote: »
    The tone of some posters here is sad to be honest; macho posturing about people getting what's coming to them and all of that other chest-puffing b*llocks.

    The reality is that two misfortunates squatting in a semi-derelict vacant building for the night were shot dead by someone who was lying in wait for them armed to the teeth. Claiming "self defense" in that situation is laughable.

    Two people were killed like, that's tragic - not an opportunity for point scoring and snyde remarks.

    Exactly. It's baffling the mentality of the full-time mad b*stard, macho posters. Considering he was tipped off about it by a neighbour it's tantamount to murder.


  • Options
    #36
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    Augme wrote: »
    I'd defend myself if I felt I was in danger. However I can't ever imagine actually wanting to murder someone just because they broke into my house. You'd want to a pretty big scumbag to do that.

    America seems to be full of all types of space cadets

    And they're armed


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    How many completely unrelated cases has gctest50 linked to have a go the victims? A stamping case from the UK, a reference to eating faces etc.

    With all those sensational examples of bad things done by people on meth, it's such a pity we have no examples of the use of guns by people who just want to kill...none...


  • Options
    #38
    qo2cj1dsne8y4k
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    Arsemageddon wrote: »
    Actually they had come down off the meth and had gone to the house to sleep.


    So if the local junkie wants to come into my house to sleep off whatever he's taken, what am I to do? Put a hot water bottle in his bed? Make him breakfast in the morning?

    Don't break into other people's house and you won't be shot


  • Options
    #39
    FTA69
    Registered Users Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    LexieOnRale wrote: »
    So if the local junkie wants to come into my house to sleep off whatever he's taken, what am I to do? Put a hot water bottle in his bed? Make him breakfast in the morning?

    Don't break into other people's house and you won't be shot

    Read the article instead of commenting ad hoc.

    The property in question was a vacant lot that the shooter in question was practically staking out waiting to shoot someone. There was no "home invasion" scenario.

    An equivalent analogy would be you owning a shed or allotment on the other side of town and you shooting a homeless lad for sleeping in it.


  • Options
    #40
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    How about some drunk homeless guy in this country trying to get a bit of shelter?

    Would we really be all for the shoot 'em all approach?

    I wouldn't. When law puts property concerns above the value of life, then I think the law needs to be looked at. Whether that be a person trying to get some sleep or a kid nicking a video player (as in the Tony Martin case). yes, when the threat posed is to the life of the occupier, clearly more force is appropriate.


  • Options
    #41
    cowboyBuilder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,419 ✭✭✭cowboyBuilder


    FTA69 wrote: »
    The tone of some posters here is sad to be honest; macho posturing about people getting what's coming to them and all of that other chest-puffing b*llocks.

    The reality is that two misfortunates squatting in a semi-derelict vacant building for the night were shot dead by someone who was lying in wait for them armed to the teeth. Claiming "self defense" in that situation is laughable.

    Two people were killed like, that's tragic - not an opportunity for point scoring and snyde remarks.

    Exactly, I'd have no problem with this if this was a genuinely threatening break in and the man did fear for his life.
    It's hard to draw the line though, but this case takes the piss.
    Strange thing is another guy was found guilty of shooting a burglar that he baited in to his garage.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    StudentDad
    Registered Users Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭StudentDad


    In my book this was murder and attempted murder. He knew the property was being used by unknown individuals. He didn't call the police. Instead he entered the property with weapons and shot two people, murdering one.

    SD

    For a man who was so afraid for his 'safety' why didn't he just call the police?


  • Options
    #43
    qo2cj1dsne8y4k
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    FTA69 wrote: »
    Read the article instead of commenting ad hoc.

    The property in question was a vacant lot that the shooter in question was practically staking out waiting to shoot someone. There was no "home invasion" scenario.

    An equivalent analogy would be you owning a shed or allotment on the other side of town and you shooting a homeless lad for sleeping in it.


    He shouldn't be in it. I don't condone shooting someone for it but he was breaking and entering. There's an old house (vacant) in our town that has been broken into and has been used by addicts in the town to use drugs in. I used to date a guard from the station in our town and he told me how they'd have to get people in to clean up the used needles, and the owners would board it back up for the same thing to happen again.



    He has every right not to want addicts on his property. Never mind the claim culture, if they hurt themselves there most likely they'd be able to sue.


  • Options
    #44
    RWCNT
    Registered Users Posts: 1,430 ✭✭✭RWCNT


    All the psychopaths of the board will expose themselves on this thread.


  • Options
    #45
    FTA69
    Registered Users Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    LexieOnRale wrote: »
    He shouldn't be in it. I don't condone shooting someone for it but he was breaking and entering. There's an old house (vacant) in our town that has been broken into and has been used by addicts in the town to use drugs in. I used to date a guard from the station in our town and he told me how they'd have to get people in to clean up the used needles, and the owners would board it back up for the same thing to happen again.



    He has every right not to want addicts on his property. Never mind the claim culture, if they hurt themselves there most likely they'd be able to sue.

    That's beside the point. I'm not saying it's desirable to have some misfortunate addicts using one of your vacant properties but that's not what we're discussing here. The issue is whether it's correct or morally ok to lie in wait for these people and practically assassinate them when they're lying down.

    As I said above, two people were shot for the horrendous crime of squatting in a vacant property - does a bit of trespass warrant the death penalty now does it?

    As I said above, there was no home invasion scenario or danger to the gunman in question, and coming out with the "tough sh*t" attitude just stinks to be honest.


  • Options
    #46
    DavidLyons_
    Registered Users Posts: 1,252 ✭✭✭DavidLyons_


    Augme wrote: »
    I'd defend myself if I felt I was in danger. However I can't ever imagine actually wanting to murder someone just because they broke into my house. You'd want to a pretty big scumbag to do that.

    Sorry, but if someone breaks into your property they do so at their own risk. So many elderly and vulnerable people at risk from intruders with mischief on their minds. I'd have no issue taking out someone breaking onto my home. My family's safety is paramount and I'm not taking any risk that the scum intuder may be unarmed etc.

    You may want to wait until you feel you're in danger, but I wouldn't be taking that risk. If they took the trouble to break-in then they are a danger to you.


  • Options
    #47
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,576 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    I read a bit more about this.

    The guy had known for a while that there were delinquents sleeping in the place, and it came up in court that he had commented before that he would lie in wait and shoot them one day. He of course said this was a joke.

    There was also testimony (from a neighbour who was following behind him in the house) that when he entered the premises he announced/shouted that he was the owner and anybody inside should come out.

    He didn't testify but there was a police interview played where he said that he saw the man who was sleeping wake up and raise something towards him which he thought was a gun ('his hand came up like a gun'), so he fired. The investigators found a torch under the dead man, but couldn't make any comment on whether he had been holding it at the time.

    The 'stand your ground' law doesn't allow for the shooter to be the 'initial agressor', but I'd like to see how that is defined legally and what constitutes the initial aggression. I wonder how critical the defendant's testimony about the raised torch was to his defence under 'stand your ground'.

    Here is the law:
    The 2011 Legislature approved Nevada's "stand your ground" law, which basically affirmed case law throughout Nevada history that upheld use of deadly force in self-defense.

    It says "justifiable homicide" is the "killing of a human being in necessary self-defense, or in defense of habitation, property or person, against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony, or against any person or persons who manifestly intend and endeavor, in a violent, riotous, tumultuous or surreptitious manner, to enter the habitation of another for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein."


  • Options
    #48
    qo2cj1dsne8y4k
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    FTA69 wrote: »
    That's beside the point. I'm not saying it's desirable to have some misfortunate addicts using one of your vacant properties but that's not what we're discussing here. The issue is whether it's correct or morally ok to lie in wait for these people and practically assassinate them when they're lying down.

    As I said above, two people were shot for the horrendous crime of squatting in a vacant property - does a bit of trespass warrant the death penalty now does it?

    As I said above, there was no home invasion scenario or danger to the gunman in question, and coming out with the "tough sh*t" attitude just stinks to be honest.


    Look, I personally wouldn't shoot someone for sleeping in a vacant building however, if I decide to break into a building, I need to take responsibly for whatever happens to me for breaking into another persons property.

    If there's a lunatic with a gun, if there's an angry dog or if there is booby traps. The owner can lie in his own building all night long with a gun if he wants. It's his building.


  • Options
    #49
    FTA69
    Registered Users Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    LexieOnRale wrote: »
    Look, I personally wouldn't shoot someone for sleeping in a vacant building however, if I decide to break into a building, I need to take responsibly for whatever happens to me for breaking into another persons property.

    If there's a lunatic with a gun, if there's an angry dog or if there is booby traps. The owner can lie in his own building all night long with a gun if he wants. It's his building.

    He can wait wherever he wants, he isn't morally entitled to murder a prone man for sleeping in his vacant and half-derelict property across town. There's an Asda near me and homeless Eastern Europeans have been sleeping near the skips after jumping over a wall to get there, by your logic the security guards are morally entitled to go out and beat the sh*t out of the poor bastards (or worse) because "they shouldn't have been there"


  • Options
    #50
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    Americans seem to believe in the right to be violent.
    It seems that they want any excuse to shoot and or kill. A lot of the time the person doing the killing knows full well that their life isn't in danger but they are in a situation whereby they can shoot some and get away with it because they can make it sound like they feared for their life.


  • Options
    #51
    FTA69
    Registered Users Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    DavidLyons_ wrote: »
    Sorry, but if someone breaks into your property they do so at their own risk. So many elderly and vulnerable people at risk from intruders with mischief on their minds. I'd have no issue taking out someone breaking onto my home. My family's safety is paramount and I'm not taking any risk that the scum intuder may be unarmed etc.

    You may want to wait until you feel you're in danger, but I wouldn't be taking that risk. If they took the trouble to break-in then they are a danger to you.

    More obfuscation and irrelevant comment. The auld fella wasn't in his own home when these two lads burgled him and threatened his life; he was staking out a vacant property and summarily shot two men for sheltering in it.

    To compare this to an aggressive home invasion type situation is inaccurate and dishonest.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    DavidLyons_
    Registered Users Posts: 1,252 ✭✭✭DavidLyons_


    FTA69 wrote: »
    More obfuscation and irrelevant comment. The auld fella wasn't in his own home when these two lads burgled him and threatened his life; he was staking out a vacant property and summarily shot two men for sheltering in it.

    To compare this to an aggressive home invasion type situation is inaccurate and dishonest.

    The post I quoted stated "I can't ever imagine actually wanting to murder someone just because they broke into my house. You'd want to a pretty big scumbag to do that."

    I also state that if you break into someone else's property you do so at your own risk. Too many people make excuses for scum who spend their lives interfering with others.


  • Options
    #53
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,576 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    LexieOnRale wrote: »
    If there's a lunatic with a gun, if there's an angry dog or if there is booby traps. The owner can lie in his own building all night long with a gun if he wants. It's his building.
    It all depends on the law.

    In Montana, a guy got 70 years in prison for shooting an intruder after leaving a garage door open with a purse visible as bait. The jury decided he was not 'reasonably fearful' for his safety.

    It will all depends on how different laws define things like aggression, reasonable belief, imminent threat, and so on.


  • Options
    #54
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    lawlolawl wrote: »
    Why were the "other two fellas" there?

    Were they popping in to visit a neighbour?

    Do you think such a flippant attitude is macho?


  • Options
    #55
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    lawlolawl wrote: »
    Why were the "other two fellas" there?

    Were they popping in to visit a neighbour?

    Guy knocks down a kid and gets convicted and sentenced, you want him executed.

    Guy executes an unarmed squatter in a derelict house, you want him honoured.

    I think there's a bit of a sinister streak in you.


  • Options
    #56
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    LexieOnRale wrote: »
    He shouldn't be in it. I don't condone shooting someone for it but he was breaking and entering. There's an old house (vacant) in our town that has been broken into and has been used by addicts in the town to use drugs in. I used to date a guard from the station in our town and he told me how they'd have to get people in to clean up the used needles, and the owners would board it back up for the same thing to happen again.



    He has every right not to want addicts on his property. Never mind the claim culture, if they hurt themselves there most likely they'd be able to sue.

    Then call the cops and have them removed.
    This asshole most likely knew they were unarmed because if he knew for certain that they were armed and dangerous he would not have dared enter the premises.


  • Options
    #57
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,106 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    DavidLyons_ wrote: »
    Sorry, but if someone breaks into your property they do so at their own risk. So many elderly and vulnerable people at risk from intruders with mischief on their minds. I'd have no issue taking out someone breaking onto my home. My family's safety is paramount and I'm not taking any risk that the scum intuder may be unarmed etc.

    You may want to wait until you feel you're in danger, but I wouldn't be taking that risk. If they took the trouble to break-in then they are a danger to you.
    +1000. Burglars are one of the lowest forms of life there is and should have zero protection from the law once they cross your threshold. There should also be much stronger sentences(fat effin chance in the ridiculous courts in Ireland).

    This US case is very different IMH. Shooting dead unarmed people in bed is scummy as hell. Self defence my arse.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #58
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    LexieOnRale wrote: »
    Look, I personally wouldn't shoot someone for sleeping in a vacant building however, if I decide to break into a building, I need to take responsibly for whatever happens to me for breaking into another persons property.

    If there's a lunatic with a gun, if there's an angry dog or if there is booby traps. The owner can lie in his own building all night long with a gun if he wants. It's his building.

    Seems to me that you too have this sadistic desire to be able to kill if you can get away with it.


  • Options
    #59
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    osarusan wrote: »
    It all depends on the law.

    In Montana, a guy got 70 years in prison for shooting an intruder after leaving a garage door open with a purse visible as bait. The jury decided he was not 'reasonably fearful' for his safety.

    It will all depends on how different laws define things like aggression, reasonable belief, imminent threat, and so on.

    Didn't that guy's charming wife make some sick comment about the repatriation of the victim's body back to Germany to his family?


  • Options
    #60
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    The flying mouse wrote: »
    This is a discussion board, we have had instances like this similar before in this country
    Next time add US in the title so you don't make people believe it's happening locally.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Augme
    Registered Users Posts: 5,294 ✭✭✭Augme


    DavidLyons_ wrote: »
    Sorry, but if someone breaks into your property they do so at their own risk. So many elderly and vulnerable people at risk from intruders with mischief on their minds. I'd have no issue taking out someone breaking onto my home. My family's safety is paramount and I'm not taking any risk that the scum intuder may be unarmed etc.

    You may want to wait until you feel you're in danger, but I wouldn't be taking that risk. If they took the trouble to break-in then they are a danger to you.


    I know you do it at your own risk. When break into someones house you don't know who owns it, could be some scumbag who is happy to shoot you. But saying "you do it at your own risk" doesn't justify shooting someone.


Advertisement