Another "Complicated" Stand Your Ground Case

Whether this case gains any traction with the press remains to be seen. Missoula, MT, is a little off the beaten path and is unlikely to jump out on the national radar but it has some curious wrinkles. Here’s the story, which is obviously still developing (http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/missoula-man-charged-with-shooting-gets-death-threats/article_e48abe1c-6785-5ce7-b4ab-cf1ffc906c7c.html).

A quick synopsis: A 29-year-old guy, recently relocated to Missoula with his girlfriend and infant child, have their home burgled twice in the last couple of months. The guy’s reportedly pissed at the Missoula PD for not getting to excited about the whole thing and decides he’s going to be a tad more proactive. He sets up an alarm system around the home with some security cameras and here’s where it gets a little sticky. His girlfriend has reportedly admitted she salted a purse with some readily traceable items and left it in the garage with the door open, presumably to bait the thieves into stealing something that would allow them to be identified if they attempted to pawn the items. Additionally, the man reportedly told a neighbor he’d been sitting up several nights in a row, hoping to catch the thieves and, if necessary, shoot “some ****in’ kid.”

Well, the plan worked. Last Saturday night the alarms go off, he sees someone in the garage on the video camera, and heads out with a shotgun. The shooter has told police he was in fear for his life and swept the garage with four shots without giving any verbal warning. And took the head off of a 17-year-old high school exchange student from Germany attending his junior year at a local Missoula high school. There was apparently another individual in the driveway, as yet unidentified, who fled the scene.

The shooter has been charged with deliberate homicide. His attorney is suggesting they will use Montana’s “Stand Your Ground” law as a defense. And the predictable shit storm has commenced, with some elected officials calling for a repeal or revision of the law while others are insisting the case is in its preliminary stages and it’s too early to make any judgements about the law. Regardless, the age of the deceased and the fact that he was a foreign exchange student is sure to muddy the waters. Local news are already running stories about what a great kid the deceased was, a talented soccer player, active in school activities, and generally well-liked and popular.

Obviously the kid had no business in this guy’s garage in the middle of the night and, once they find the other party that fled the scene, I suspect it’s going to come out that they were planning to rip the guy off (although that’s pure conjecture on my part). But setting out “bait” for the thieves, knowing there’s a person in the garage, and just hosing it down with a shotgun without so much as a “Hey, Mother****er!” is starting to venture into a pretty gray area, at least by my reckoning.

Anyway, could be an interesting case.

Whenever you bait people it gets real sticky. Sounds a lot like the nut in Little Falls, Minn who baited some kids and killed them.

http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/de...ed-in-own-home

I have no sympathy for thieves, gas station employees shoot and kill people taking 20$ worth of items pretty regularly around my area. Do I think 20$ of junk food is worth taking a life, no but in many cases it is justified here. In this instance I have trouble not seeing this as some sort of premeditated murder with all the baiting and telling neighbors your plans (if true of course). If this does not make national news please keep us updated, I too would like to see the emerging details and conclusion.

Was just about to bring this up. Read about this the other day when the guy was convicted.

I assume you are tying to link to this: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/04/29/minn-homeowner-convicted-premeditated-murder/ but your link does not seem to work.

Why there people going around telling their neighbors about their plans and making it obviously premeditated is beyond me. There are enough crime review shows on the Discovery Channel alone to figure out how to do this with limited exposure lol. Sheesh! :smiley:

These things happen.

His lawyer is making the case one of “stand your ground” when it isn’t. Amazingly, it’s like how Trayvon’s side tried to make their case one of “stand your ground” when it clearly wasn’t either.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Wrongful acts on both sides, but the whole shindig was started with the illegal actions of a thief.
Appropriate levels of justice are hard to find when half the public is gonna feel sorry for the kid that was stealing…no sense of right and wrong…I’m a broken record.

I don’t see how the owners actions null the fact the teenager entered their home to burglar them. Is there a portion of the law that says you have to give a verbal warning first? If I got burglarized twice in a short period of time I might sit up with a gun, too. That’s premeditated homicide now?

That’s premeditated homicide now?

Expressing a willingness or desire to shoot a fvcking kid may count as premeditation. Otherwise I agree.

I wouldn’t take issue with baiting a petty thief with the intent to catch in the act and call the police or identify them for the police but to bait with intent to shoot counts as murder.

I actually think that the baiting is pretty effin stupid because he had no idea who the thief was or if they were armed as well. Put the cameras and lights up and assume a defensive posture but to bust in like Mr. Majestik shooting up your own garage undermines your own claim of victimhood.

So how are the vice police tactics of baiting people by posing as prostitutes or drug buyers legally kosher?

In many states, if someone enters your home illegally, you are assumed by law to be in fear for your life.

I don’t know MT law, but it’ll be hard for this guy to prove he was in fear for his life if the law doesn’t de facto assume it.

Hmmm this is an interesting case. On one hand you’ve got someone in a residence that doesn’t belong there. On the other hand we have a someone who has admitted to purposefully luring in a burglar with the intentions of shooting them.

While I don’t see a problem with shooting an intruder, I do see a problem with seeking out that situation.

Also the afore mentioned comparison to “vice police tactics” is a laughable comparison, at best.

I don’t think he has a chance in hell of winning this one. The only chance he has if he went to Police and said look I’m in fear for life, and the life of my family members and they said… we can’t do anything. Then they have to say… ok, we baited the garage in order to keep them from coming in the main house. If this were someone really rich person or a politician, they could probably pull it off but I don’t see an ordinary citizen making this work.

Here are the relevant codes (to the best of my knowledge) pertaining to Montana’s “Castle Doctrine” and “Stand Your Ground” laws (http://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca_toc/45_3_1.htm):

[i]45-3-101. Definitions. (1) “Force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm” within the meaning of this chapter includes but is not limited to:
(a) the firing of a firearm in the direction of a person, even though no purpose exists to kill or inflict serious bodily harm; and
(b) the firing of a firearm at a vehicle in which a person is riding.
(2) “Forcible felony” means any felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

45-3-102. Use of force in defense of person. A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that the conduct is necessary for self-defense or the defense of another against the other person’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, the person is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm to the person or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

45-3-103. Use of force in defense of occupied structure. (1) A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that the use of force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person’s unlawful entry into or attack upon an occupied structure.
(2) A person justified in the use of force pursuant to subsection (1) is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if:
(a) the entry is made or attempted and the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent an assault upon the person or another then in the occupied structure; or
(b) the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony in the occupied structure.

45-3-104. Use of force in defense of other property. A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that the conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person’s trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with either real property, other than an occupied structure, or personal property lawfully in the person’s possession or in the possession of another who is a member of the person’s immediate family or household or of a person whose property the person has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
[/i]
The law is pretty broad, at least from a layman’s perspective.

Here’s another article on the case from the Missoula paper yesterday: http://missoulian.com/news/local/castle-doctrine-may-apply-in-missoula-teen-s-killing-author/article_4732de74-cf01-11e3-981a-0019bb2963f4.html

From what you posted, he’s ****ed lol.

Well, legal is not always right…

And, personally, I think drugs and prostitution should be decriminialized. That said, in the situation described in the OP, the entire event occurred because the kid trespassed. If he never entered the garage, the guy would have done nothing more than stay up all night waiting.

In MT, the word “necessary” is in the law for the use of lethal force. No reasonable person is going to agree that lethal force was necessary to remove the kid when he didn’t even give the kid a chance to leave on his own. And it’s not only that lethal force was necessary, but that it was necessary to prevent a forcible felony. There is absolutely no way that any reasonable person would believe that a forcible felony was about to occur.

And because he wanted someone to enter his garage, the entire premise that the kid was trespassing is debatable, which would make this murder 1 without even having to determine necessity.

Baiting a thief is no different from the “look what she’s wearing” crap rapists say. What’s next, you can’t leave your car outside because it’s too inviting to car thieves? People who get robbed over and over and find out they are on their own tend to act like they are on their own. Anyone who has not experienced continued theft of their property (especially while they are at work, or sleeping because they have to get up and work) just don’t know what this is like.

People bust their ass to have the things they need and for today’s working class those items aren’t as replaceable as they once were when people enjoyed a better economy.

Also I don’t know why ANY “stand your ground” case wouldn’t be as cut and dry as this one.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2010-09-17/news/fl-pompano-road-rage-20100916_1_road-rage-florida-law-mike-dutko

Cleveland Murdock (black guy) fatally shot Patrick Lavoie (white guy) from the inside of his vehicle because he felt threatened. The windows were up, Lavoie never even physically touched the guy and Lavoie was unarmed. Murdock was never arrested or charged with a crime.

Al Sharpton never showed up, Nancy Grace didn’t do six months worth of stories and most people here have never heard of Murdock or Lavoie.

Most here have expressed a willingness to use deadly force if somebody breaks into their home. Does that now establish all of us as premeditated murderers?

I’ll say it plainly, if somebody tries to kill my wife I will try and prevent it even if I have to kill them. Is that premeditation?

Actually he needs to stop talking completely and listen to the advice of his lawyer at this point. He’s already said enough.