Father shoots 17 year old daughters BF in her bed. She told dad she didn't know him.

[captdave77]

lol, I think the point of contention is this: Does poor decision making that leads to death deserve criminal prosecution. There is plenty of precedence to say "yes".

Not when the last poor decision is to move when told not to in someone else's home.

 

[captdave77]

If ifs and buts were candies and nuts we'd all have a merry christmas

All those questions would be asked if the parents were to sue.

 

[chucklenut]

To what end and to get what?

How much are you going to spend to get her piggy bank?

What poor decisions did the deceased make that led to his own demise?

He is alive if:

He does not sneak out of his house.
He does not sneak into another house.
He does not move when told not to.

given those 3 things are true

and he didnt have to sneak in if the daughter let him in (sneaking in implies that no one knew he was there or what he was doing, the daughter is old enough and INVITED him.....ergo the issue)

 

[captdave77]

If you cross against the light, get hit and die, the driver is not at fault. Does that mean a person should be put to death for jaywalking?

 

[captdave77]

given those 3 things are true

and he didnt have to sneak in if the daughter let him in (sneaking in implies that no one knew he was there or what he was doing, the daughter is old enough and INVITED him.....ergo the issue)

"Shhh be quiet. If my father catches us…."

I'm sure something like that was said and that implies they both knew they were doing something against the wishes of the homeowner. ergo "sneaking"

 

[chucklenut]

"Shhh be quiet. If my father catches us…."

I'm sure something like that was said and that implies they both knew they were doing something against the wishes of the homeowner.

maybe, but that doesnt mean she didnt invite him in.

im just going by what the complaints will probably be in any following civil action

 

[sparked1]

If you cross against the light, get hit and die, the driver is not at fault. Does that mean a person should be put to death for jaywalking?

If there is evidence to show that the driver had sufficient room to brake or swerve, but attempted to do neither, and perhaps even sped up simply because he had the right of way, he could possibly be charged, yes.

 

[captdave77]

If there is evidence to show that the driver had sufficient room to brake or swerve, but attempted to do neither, and perhaps even sped up simply because he had the right of way, he could possibly be charged, yes.

For the sake of argument we assume the driver is not at fault and the driver was not the point of the question.

 

[Laufen]

For the sake of argument we assume the driver is not at fault and the driver was not the point of the question.

To complete the analogy, we'd have to assume that the passenger in the car waved the pedestrian into the crosswalk.

 

[sparked1]

For the sake of argument we assume the driver is not at fault and the driver was not the point of the question.

I'm just stirring the pot, but isn't that really the whole argument? Just because he had the right to shoot an uninvited person in his home, did the situation warrant it? Does the Castle Doctrine care about circumstances other than the fact that there was an uninvited [by him] guest in his home, hence, an intruder?