Middle school boy shot by homeowner "defending cars" in Brookland

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

How did he not break the law? I'm confused.

Because if he had he’d have been arrested. QED.

Or, he hasn't been arrested *yet*.

Also, the police are far from perfect

So if the police do not arrest him they made a mistake?

What basis do you have for claiming that the police are acting in error.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

Oh, you were there?

No. But the police were there and as a society we rely on them to enforce the law. Are you an expert on DC criminal law? We’re you there? Have you taken statements and conducted an investigation?

I didn't suggest anything one way or the other because, like you, I don't know any details, including any evidence police are gathering to corroborate the shooter's story.

What evidence do you think the police need to collect to determine that the person broken any laws?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

Oh, you were there?

No. But the police were there and as a society we rely on them to enforce the law. Are you an expert on DC criminal law? We’re you there? Have you taken statements and conducted an investigation?

I didn't suggest anything one way or the other because, like you, I don't know any details, including any evidence police are gathering to corroborate the shooter's story.

What evidence do you think the police need to collect to determine that the person broken any laws?

I suspect they will collect doorbell camera footage if available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

Yes he did. You can’t use deadly force unless you are at risk of dying. You can’t use deadly force for a property crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

Oh, you were there?

No. But the police were there and as a society we rely on them to enforce the law. Are you an expert on DC criminal law? We’re you there? Have you taken statements and conducted an investigation?

I didn't suggest anything one way or the other because, like you, I don't know any details, including any evidence police are gathering to corroborate the shooter's story.

What evidence do you think the police need to collect to determine that the person broken any laws?

I suspect they will collect doorbell camera footage if available.

And what do you think that would need to show to determine that a crime was committed?

[Anonymous]

Don't know what the police are planning. But personally, if someone was breaking into my car and my neighbor came out and saw them doing it, I would not want my neighbor to shoot them. (If I saw them, I wouldn't shoot them, because I don't have a gun.) Sort of seems to go without needing to be said, but I guess not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

How did he not break the law? I'm confused.

Because if he had he’d have been arrested. QED.

Right.... how long did it take for George Floyd's killers to be arrested? Ahmaud Aubrey? Though he ultimately got off, George Zimmerman wasn't brought to trial until more than six weeks, and after large protests, after kiling Trayvon Martin. How simplistic of you to think just because he wasn't arrested right away a crime wasn't committed.

If his actions had obviously violated the law he would have been arrested immediately.

There is no duty to retreat to claim self defense in DC and the man has a right to defend his property. Due to the proliferation of gun crimes in the city, there is a strong case to be made that there was concern of imminent damages such that force was necessary and obviously if a gun is proportionate to the perceived risk in that situation where someone is breaking into cars at 4 AM with a strong likelihood that the suspect was armed.

From https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/page_content/attachments/District%20Law%20Pertaining%20to%20Self%20Defense.pdf

You are entitled to claim self-defense:
(1) if you actually believe you are in imminent danger of bodily harm; and
(2) if you have reasonable grounds for that belief.

Could there be a scenario where he confronted the child and it then led to a situation where he reasonably believed he was in danger? Yes, it's possible. But based on the (very limited) facts we have, I wouldn't bet on it. Whether there's enough evidence to convict him is a totally different question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

Yes he did. You can’t use deadly force unless you are at risk of dying. You can’t use deadly force for a property crime.

That’s not what the law says. You only have to reasonably believe that you are in imminent threat of harm and your response needs to be proportionate to the perceived risk of harm.

Is it reasonable or unreasonable to believe that someone in DC that you see breaking into cars on your block at 4 AM is armed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

Oh, you were there?

No. But the police were there and as a society we rely on them to enforce the law. Are you an expert on DC criminal law? We’re you there? Have you taken statements and conducted an investigation?

I didn't suggest anything one way or the other because, like you, I don't know any details, including any evidence police are gathering to corroborate the shooter's story.

What evidence do you think the police need to collect to determine that the person broken any laws?

I suspect they will collect doorbell camera footage if available.

And what do you think that would need to show to determine that a crime was committed?

Look I’m aghast at this tragedy-I am just saying if the homeowner claimed he feared for his life they will likely see if there is video of the incident that confirms or refutes the story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

How did he not break the law? I'm confused.

Because if he had he’d have been arrested. QED.

Right.... how long did it take for George Floyd's killers to be arrested? Ahmaud Aubrey? Though he ultimately got off, George Zimmerman wasn't brought to trial until more than six weeks, and after large protests, after kiling Trayvon Martin. How simplistic of you to think just because he wasn't arrested right away a crime wasn't committed.

If his actions had obviously violated the law he would have been arrested immediately.

There is no duty to retreat to claim self defense in DC and the man has a right to defend his property. Due to the proliferation of gun crimes in the city, there is a strong case to be made that there was concern of imminent damages such that force was necessary and obviously if a gun is proportionate to the perceived risk in that situation where someone is breaking into cars at 4 AM with a strong likelihood that the suspect was armed.

From https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/page_content/attachments/District%20Law%20Pertaining%20to%20Self%20Defense.pdf

You are entitled to claim self-defense:
(1) if you actually believe you are in imminent danger of bodily harm; and
(2) if you have reasonable grounds for that belief.

Could there be a scenario where he confronted the child and it then led to a situation where he reasonably believed he was in danger? Yes, it's possible. But based on the (very limited) facts we have, I wouldn't bet on it. Whether there's enough evidence to convict him is a totally different question.

You are not aware of the facts to assume anything. He has not been arrested and charged because it’s not obvious that a crime has been committed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't know what the police are planning. But personally, if someone was breaking into my car and my neighbor came out and saw them doing it, I would not want my neighbor to shoot them. (If I saw them, I wouldn't shoot them, because I don't have a gun.) Sort of seems to go without needing to be said, but I guess not.

Fortunately, the law is not enforced based on your feelings or desires.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

Yes he did. You can’t use deadly force unless you are at risk of dying. You can’t use deadly force for a property crime.

That’s not what the law says. You only have to reasonably believe that you are in imminent threat of harm and your response needs to be proportionate to the perceived risk of harm.

Is it reasonable or unreasonable to believe that someone in DC that you see breaking into cars on your block at 4 AM is armed?

I don't think it's reasonable to respond by shooting them. The reasonable response is to call the police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

Oh, you were there?

No. But the police were there and as a society we rely on them to enforce the law. Are you an expert on DC criminal law? We’re you there? Have you taken statements and conducted an investigation?

I didn't suggest anything one way or the other because, like you, I don't know any details, including any evidence police are gathering to corroborate the shooter's story.

What evidence do you think the police need to collect to determine that the person broken any laws?

I suspect they will collect doorbell camera footage if available.

And what do you think that would need to show to determine that a crime was committed?

Look I’m aghast at this tragedy-I am just saying if the homeowner claimed he feared for his life they will likely see if there is video of the incident that confirms or refutes the story.

The law does not require that he “feared for his life” for it to be valid self-defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

Yes he did. You can’t use deadly force unless you are at risk of dying. You can’t use deadly force for a property crime.

That’s not what the law says. You only have to reasonably believe that you are in imminent threat of harm and your response needs to be proportionate to the perceived risk of harm.

Is it reasonable or unreasonable to believe that someone in DC that you see breaking into cars on your block at 4 AM is armed?

I don't think it's reasonable to respond by shooting them. The reasonable response is to call the police.

It’s good that you think that but thats not what the law requires.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How has the shooter not been arrested? Are citizens just allowed to execute people on the street that they suspect of property theft?

Because he didn’t break the law.

Yes he did. You can’t use deadly force unless you are at risk of dying. You can’t use deadly force for a property crime.

That’s not what the law says. You only have to reasonably believe that you are in imminent threat of harm and your response needs to be proportionate to the perceived risk of harm.

Is it reasonable or unreasonable to believe that someone in DC that you see breaking into cars on your block at 4 AM is armed?

Um, unreasonable? If someone is armed, wants your car, and is okay with harming you, they'll carjack you.

Messing with cars in the middle of the night seems like the act of someone who wants to avoid people.