HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » 17y/o unarmed girl shot i...

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:25 AM

17y/o unarmed girl shot in the head, no charges will be filed due to Alabama's Stand Your Ground.

Summer moody probably wont survive or else if she does make it, she'll be extremely brain damaged maybe even vegetative. Sad.



BAY MINETTE, Alabama - Baldwin County High School student Summer Moody, 17, may have been partying Sunday at 4 a.m.with three other males, all 17, on Gravine Island when someone among the four decided to burglarize a fish camp.
Inside, three fishermen were asleep among the many camps, some with only a roof, some with walls. Startled by the attempted break-in, two men fired rifles in the darkness at the intruders, according to Sheriff Huey “Hoss” Mack, afer a briefing with investigators Monday morning.
One shot hit Moody in the head. She was 15- to 30-feet from the dwelling. She was listed in critical condition Monday at the University of South Alabama Medical Center.
Investigators are not sure at this time which rifle delivered the blow or the exact location of the juveniles. Mack said the motive appears to be burglary, and that preliminary evidence indicates the males had broken into at least two other dwellings on the remote island.

http://tinyurl.com/7lokzjd

Summer Moody was supposed to be sleeping over at a girlfriend's house in Bay Minette on Saturday night. She texted her mom at midnight about plans to swim in the creek the next day.

Her mother told News 5 she was surprised to say the least when authorities called her at four in the morning to say her daughter had been shot in the head - fifteen miles away from Bay Minette on Gravine Island.

"Until Summer can tell us what happened, then we wont know why she was there," said her Pastor, Matthew Kelly.

Those who know Summer describe her as a good kid, a star volleyball player for Baldwin County High School. She graduated in December, and planned to walk in May. Summer Moody was working as a hostess at Lambert's restaurant, hoping to one day study cosmetology.

"She was a good student," said Baldwin County School Spokesperson Terry Wilhite. "She was on her game, not only on the court, but on the academic field as well."

http://tinyurl.com/7ykryld

476 replies, 240030 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 476 replies Author Time Post
Reply 17y/o unarmed girl shot in the head, no charges will be filed due to Alabama's Stand Your Ground. (Original post)
moobu2 Apr 2012 OP
Meiko Apr 2012 #1
jtuck004 Apr 2012 #5
pnwmom Apr 2012 #12
jtuck004 Apr 2012 #34
pnwmom Apr 2012 #39
jtuck004 Apr 2012 #74
pnwmom Apr 2012 #80
jtuck004 Apr 2012 #84
pnwmom Apr 2012 #94
PavePusher Apr 2012 #124
oneshooter Apr 2012 #125
pnwmom Apr 2012 #128
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #344
pnwmom Apr 2012 #445
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #446
pnwmom Apr 2012 #456
mvccd1000 Apr 2012 #2
DiverDave Apr 2012 #3
Skittles Apr 2012 #4
abelenkpe Apr 2012 #20
ellisonz Apr 2012 #37
rl6214 Apr 2012 #97
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #255
rl6214 Apr 2012 #389
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #403
rl6214 Apr 2012 #424
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #427
eqfan592 Apr 2012 #137
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #139
Skittles Apr 2012 #142
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #144
Skittles Apr 2012 #145
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #147
Skittles Apr 2012 #148
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #151
Skittles Apr 2012 #152
cleanhippie Apr 2012 #378
cleanhippie Apr 2012 #377
oneshooter Apr 2012 #381
Skittles Apr 2012 #141
cleanhippie Apr 2012 #376
pnwmom Apr 2012 #13
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2012 #30
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #213
pnwmom Apr 2012 #215
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #253
pnwmom Apr 2012 #271
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #284
pnwmom Apr 2012 #443
gejohnston Apr 2012 #449
pnwmom Apr 2012 #454
gejohnston Apr 2012 #459
pnwmom Apr 2012 #461
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #257
sarisataka Apr 2012 #258
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #269
sarisataka Apr 2012 #282
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #293
sarisataka Apr 2012 #383
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #384
sarisataka Apr 2012 #385
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #387
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #447
sarisataka Apr 2012 #448
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #450
pnwmom Apr 2012 #444
gejohnston Apr 2012 #451
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #453
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #452
shadowrider Apr 2012 #406
gejohnston Apr 2012 #260
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #261
gejohnston Apr 2012 #263
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #272
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #292
gejohnston Apr 2012 #295
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #312
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #296
pnwmom Apr 2012 #306
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #310
pnwmom Apr 2012 #326
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #336
pnwmom Apr 2012 #341
baldguy Apr 2012 #404
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #411
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #307
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #311
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #313
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #267
pnwmom Apr 2012 #273
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #280
pnwmom Apr 2012 #289
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #298
pnwmom Apr 2012 #302
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #315
pnwmom Apr 2012 #324
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #352
pnwmom Apr 2012 #360
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #367
gejohnston Apr 2012 #276
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #279
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #291
pnwmom Apr 2012 #328
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #346
pnwmom Apr 2012 #351
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #371
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #374
gejohnston Apr 2012 #294
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #300
ellisonz Apr 2012 #402
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #413
pnwmom Apr 2012 #432
mvccd1000 Apr 2012 #22
frylock Apr 2012 #38
pnwmom Apr 2012 #43
Brkh Apr 2012 #87
pnwmom Apr 2012 #156
krispos42 Apr 2012 #365
pnwmom Apr 2012 #11
rl6214 Apr 2012 #99
pnwmom Apr 2012 #100
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #184
pnwmom Apr 2012 #185
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #189
pnwmom Apr 2012 #274
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #308
pnwmom Apr 2012 #354
shadowrider Apr 2012 #407
cleanhippie Apr 2012 #379
pnwmom Apr 2012 #392
DonP Apr 2012 #414
pnwmom Apr 2012 #417
gejohnston Apr 2012 #418
pnwmom Apr 2012 #431
Starboard Tack Apr 2012 #106
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #186
caseymoz Apr 2012 #439
mvccd1000 Apr 2012 #440
caseymoz Apr 2012 #441
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #457
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #455
baldguy Apr 2012 #6
SATIRical Apr 2012 #29
pnwmom Apr 2012 #45
SATIRical Apr 2012 #59
pnwmom Apr 2012 #60
SATIRical Apr 2012 #66
pnwmom Apr 2012 #71
SATIRical Apr 2012 #83
rl6214 Apr 2012 #103
pnwmom Apr 2012 #157
rl6214 Apr 2012 #166
DiverDave Apr 2012 #92
pnwmom Apr 2012 #96
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #146
pnwmom Apr 2012 #158
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #160
pnwmom Apr 2012 #163
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #167
pnwmom Apr 2012 #168
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #171
DiverDave Apr 2012 #212
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #217
pnwmom Apr 2012 #222
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #250
DiverDave Apr 2012 #225
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #233
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #252
baldguy Apr 2012 #405
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #412
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #232
SATIRical Apr 2012 #242
baldguy Apr 2012 #107
pnwmom Apr 2012 #173
baldguy Apr 2012 #226
WinniSkipper Apr 2012 #265
pnwmom Apr 2012 #275
SATIRical Apr 2012 #244
DonP Apr 2012 #36
pnwmom Apr 2012 #42
DonP Apr 2012 #58
pnwmom Apr 2012 #81
baldguy Apr 2012 #108
gejohnston Apr 2012 #111
baldguy Apr 2012 #119
gejohnston Apr 2012 #123
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #161
pnwmom Apr 2012 #174
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #177
pnwmom Apr 2012 #187
rl6214 Apr 2012 #101
baldguy Apr 2012 #109
Lunabelle Apr 2012 #7
Callisto32 Apr 2012 #8
pnwmom Apr 2012 #197
Callisto32 Apr 2012 #228
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #318
SaltyBro Apr 2012 #9
pnwmom Apr 2012 #10
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #52
pnwmom Apr 2012 #95
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #182
pnwmom Apr 2012 #183
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #192
pnwmom Apr 2012 #195
ileus Apr 2012 #14
pnwmom Apr 2012 #46
DonP Apr 2012 #64
frylock Apr 2012 #88
pnwmom Apr 2012 #98
gejohnston Apr 2012 #102
rl6214 Apr 2012 #115
pnwmom Apr 2012 #118
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #194
pnwmom Apr 2012 #196
sarisataka Apr 2012 #15
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #25
pnwmom Apr 2012 #199
sarisataka Apr 2012 #251
gejohnston Apr 2012 #254
pnwmom Apr 2012 #281
gejohnston Apr 2012 #286
pnwmom Apr 2012 #304
aquart Apr 2012 #16
abelenkpe Apr 2012 #21
pnwmom Apr 2012 #47
TheCowsCameHome Apr 2012 #17
Remmah2 Apr 2012 #19
TheCowsCameHome Apr 2012 #24
Remmah2 Apr 2012 #26
pnwmom Apr 2012 #49
Remmah2 Apr 2012 #55
pnwmom Apr 2012 #48
jpak Apr 2012 #18
Hoyt Apr 2012 #23
riverwalker Apr 2012 #27
rl6214 Apr 2012 #117
pnwmom Apr 2012 #198
WinniSkipper Apr 2012 #278
pnwmom Apr 2012 #287
WinniSkipper Apr 2012 #290
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #28
moobu2 Apr 2012 #32
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #33
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #31
pnwmom Apr 2012 #40
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #50
pnwmom Apr 2012 #56
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #57
pnwmom Apr 2012 #82
Hoyt Apr 2012 #178
moobu2 Apr 2012 #35
pnwmom Apr 2012 #41
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #51
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #44
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #53
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #54
pnwmom Apr 2012 #62
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #67
pnwmom Apr 2012 #69
gejohnston Apr 2012 #75
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #76
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #78
pnwmom Apr 2012 #79
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #89
DiverDave Apr 2012 #227
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #234
pnwmom Apr 2012 #288
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #299
pnwmom Apr 2012 #301
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #305
pnwmom Apr 2012 #309
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #316
pnwmom Apr 2012 #323
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #325
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #150
pnwmom Apr 2012 #153
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #155
pnwmom Apr 2012 #162
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #170
pnwmom Apr 2012 #172
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #176
pnwmom Apr 2012 #188
oneshooter Apr 2012 #382
gejohnston Apr 2012 #164
pnwmom Apr 2012 #165
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #200
pnwmom Apr 2012 #201
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #236
pnwmom Apr 2012 #462
gejohnston Apr 2012 #463
pnwmom Apr 2012 #464
gejohnston Apr 2012 #465
pnwmom Apr 2012 #466
gejohnston Apr 2012 #467
pnwmom Apr 2012 #468
gejohnston Apr 2012 #469
pnwmom Apr 2012 #470
gejohnston Apr 2012 #471
pnwmom Apr 2012 #61
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #63
TheCowsCameHome Apr 2012 #65
X_Digger Apr 2012 #68
TheCowsCameHome Apr 2012 #85
Clames Apr 2012 #90
X_Digger Apr 2012 #91
pnwmom Apr 2012 #169
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #70
pnwmom Apr 2012 #73
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #77
rl6214 Apr 2012 #121
rl6214 Apr 2012 #120
pnwmom Apr 2012 #72
DonP Apr 2012 #86
pnwmom Apr 2012 #104
gejohnston Apr 2012 #105
pnwmom Apr 2012 #110
gejohnston Apr 2012 #113
pnwmom Apr 2012 #114
gejohnston Apr 2012 #116
PavePusher Apr 2012 #126
pnwmom Apr 2012 #127
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #129
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #321
baldguy Apr 2012 #112
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #130
baldguy Apr 2012 #132
oneshooter Apr 2012 #133
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #135
baldguy Apr 2012 #140
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #143
pnwmom Apr 2012 #203
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #239
baldguy Apr 2012 #224
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #241
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #159
ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #154
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2012 #175
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #229
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #317
pnwmom Apr 2012 #332
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #348
pnwmom Apr 2012 #349
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #366
pnwmom Apr 2012 #372
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #373
pnwmom Apr 2012 #393
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #394
pnwmom Apr 2012 #395
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #419
gejohnston Apr 2012 #420
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #422
pnwmom Apr 2012 #428
beevul Apr 2012 #401
Marengo Apr 2012 #475
pnwmom Apr 2012 #193
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #230
PavePusher Apr 2012 #314
DonP Apr 2012 #363
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #237
chrisa Apr 2012 #425
baldguy Apr 2012 #430
rl6214 Apr 2012 #93
baldguy Apr 2012 #122
Clames Apr 2012 #131
baldguy Apr 2012 #134
Clames Apr 2012 #136
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #138
pnwmom Apr 2012 #190
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #202
pnwmom Apr 2012 #205
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #214
pnwmom Apr 2012 #216
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #245
pnwmom Apr 2012 #334
oneshooter Apr 2012 #388
Hoyt Apr 2012 #179
rl6214 Apr 2012 #149
Hoyt Apr 2012 #180
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #181
ileus Apr 2012 #231
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #243
ileus Apr 2012 #277
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #283
pnwmom Apr 2012 #191
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #204
pnwmom Apr 2012 #207
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #209
pnwmom Apr 2012 #219
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #256
pnwmom Apr 2012 #266
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #319
pnwmom Apr 2012 #322
rl6214 Apr 2012 #386
pnwmom Apr 2012 #396
WinniSkipper Apr 2012 #416
pnwmom Apr 2012 #206
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #211
pnwmom Apr 2012 #218
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #247
moobu2 Apr 2012 #208
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #210
pnwmom Apr 2012 #221
moobu2 Apr 2012 #223
pnwmom Apr 2012 #335
Clames Apr 2012 #249
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #262
pnwmom Apr 2012 #220
Hoyt Apr 2012 #235
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #259
Hoyt Apr 2012 #264
AH1Apache Apr 2012 #268
Hoyt Apr 2012 #270
AH1Apache Apr 2012 #390
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #303
pnwmom Apr 2012 #338
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #342
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #391
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #320
pnwmom Apr 2012 #339
pnwmom Apr 2012 #337
pnwmom Apr 2012 #330
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #333
pnwmom Apr 2012 #343
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #347
pnwmom Apr 2012 #350
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #358
pnwmom Apr 2012 #361
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #364
pnwmom Apr 2012 #433
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #415
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #238
moobu2 Apr 2012 #285
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #297
moobu2 Apr 2012 #329
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #331
PavePusher Apr 2012 #368
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #248
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #327
pnwmom Apr 2012 #340
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #345
pnwmom Apr 2012 #353
gejohnston Apr 2012 #356
pnwmom Apr 2012 #357
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #359
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #240
Callisto32 Apr 2012 #246
pnwmom Apr 2012 #355
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #362
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #380
pnwmom Apr 2012 #398
gejohnston Apr 2012 #400
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #410
pnwmom Apr 2012 #436
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #409
PavePusher Apr 2012 #370
AtheistCrusader Apr 2012 #369
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #375
pnwmom Apr 2012 #397
gejohnston Apr 2012 #399
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #408
ileus Apr 2012 #421
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #423
oneshooter Apr 2012 #426
pnwmom Apr 2012 #429
gejohnston Apr 2012 #434
pnwmom Apr 2012 #435
gejohnston Apr 2012 #437
WinniSkipper Apr 2012 #438
oneshooter Apr 2012 #442
oneshooter Apr 2012 #460
gejohnston Apr 2012 #458
moobu2 Apr 2012 #474
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #472
moobu2 Apr 2012 #473
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #476

Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:35 AM

1. I am thinking that the SYG/Castle Doctrine does not apply

 

They fired rifles into the darkness without even seeing their target.If you are saying the reason they fired is because they felt they would be covered under SYG that's some pretty thin ice for shooting someone. I wouldn't want to go to court with this one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meiko (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:26 AM

5. Actually they fired at intruders that had broken down the door of their cabin

while they were asleep, who chose to break in while it was dark, and shot when they were startled\threatened, not because of SYG. There is speculation that the law will cover them, but there is no official decision yet that I can find. But in a remote location, no law enforcement around, that's just asking to get shot, SYG or no SYG.

It doesn't say exactly, but it sounds like they shot from inside, toward the noise, and the bullet went through the house and into the yard. If that's the case they shouldn't be prosecuted, though if she dies I would expect the burglars that caused this to be prosecuted for her murder. Hope so, anyway.

Once they got control they loaded her into a boat, it appears, and tried to get medical attention.

It also says the guys she was with are suspected of other burglaries among the fishing shacks in the area.

Tragic situation all around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #5)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:00 AM

12. . The police didn't say they shot because they were startled or threatened,

or that they shot from inside the house. The men "chased the kids by foot." From the link:

"But investigators paint a different picture of the 17-year-old. They say Moody and three other juveniles were burglarizing a fish camp on the island. They were caught by three men from Mobile who chased the kids by foot. One of them pulled a gun and fired. Moody was hit in the back of the head."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:49 AM

34. Startled by the attempted break-in, two men fired rifles in the darkness at the intruders...


I guess it depends on which version one reads....

In one a single shot, in another two, in one version they chased, in another it sounds like they shot from inside, one version sounds like a pistol was used, in another two rifles. I'm a lot less forgiving of shooters who leave their safety to pursue, but being burglarized by strangers in the dark doesn't leave you a lot of time to decide whether they are armed, out to kill you, or exactly what is happening, but it is clear who created the tragedy.

Regardless of their excuses people need to respect other's property, and the little cowards that decided to commit the crime in the first place need to be held as responsible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #34)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:06 PM

39. All we have now is the adults word for it that the teens were breaking in.

For all we know, the kids were just messing around, and the adults, having heard of previous break-ins, got a little paranoid. Ever heard of Trayvon Martin?

And we don't know if the shooters had been drinking, do we? That could have impaired their judgment.

All I'm saying is that we shouldn't be prejudging. We don't know anything for a fact right now, except that the girl was shot in the back of the head by someone.

Here's something from today:

http://www2.wkrg.com/news/2012/apr/17/summer-moody-update-ar-3623945/

Attorney Robert Stankowski says the family is frustrated about how Summer is being portrayed in this case, when there is no evidence at this point that she did anything wrong.

"We certainly have a lot of questions involved about whether or not the use of deadly force would have been appropriate under these circumstances. What these men were doing out there when they were firing these shots, whether or not alcohol was involved, whether or not these men put themselves in the zone of danger and created this situation," says attorney Robert Stankowski.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #39)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:00 PM

74. They weren't just messing around, they are suspected of having committed criminal acts, and.

three have been arrested and charged.

http://www.local15tv.com/news/local/story/Teen-Shooting-Victims-Mom-Talks/1wsP1vx5_ESD2c6p-k_CvQ.cspx
"The Baldwin County Sheriff says Moody and three other teenagers went to Gravine Island by boat on Sunday around 4 a.m. The three teenage boys are now charged with burglary in the third degree.
"The teens broke into at least two different fish hunting camps we believe with the intent to commit theft," said Sheriff Huey Hoss Mack.
The Sheriff says the teens then broke into a third camp. Two men staying there opened fire. A bullet hit Moody in the back of the head.
"It is being alleged that those shots were in a warning type of nature," said Sheriff Mack.
At this time, the District Attorney doesn't plan to file charges against the shooters.


I am troubled by reports that they chased them and then shot. There are reason for such things, especially in remote areas, but that is generally unwise.

On the other hand, if the suspected criminals were committing burglary it would be too much of a stretch to think that she didn't know. Not vilifying her, but there is no reason to resort to minimizing the criminal behavior of the three young men or of her own responsibility.

I am 100% in favor of people in a home defending it with lethal force, because there are evil people in the world, like this. Sometimes such incidents are stopped because of mothers like this. If she has the right, then everyone must.

The lawyer for the family is a paid advocate who might generate great fees by simply telling the family what they want to hear, or by how they shape the public perception. Kinda like Ronald Reagan. That proves nothing.

It is disrespectful to Trayvon to say the circumstances are comparable. He was hunted and pursued because of the paranoia about his skin color. He had done nothing wrong, had a legal right to be where he was, died near or within sight of his front door, perhaps running to get there. Here we have three who have been charged with burglary and a mother dealing with her grief, perhaps casting about to find anything other than her daughter's irresponsible behavior to hang this on, and at least one shooter who may or may not have done anything other than protect themselves.

I have no doubt the kids thought this was relatively innocent. They were wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #74)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:20 PM

80. You don't know they weren't just messing around. They are only SUSPECTS.

How do you know it wasn't other people who had been doing the burglaries? The facts aren't in yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #80)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:44 PM

84. I don't know, and neither do you. But three were arrested and charged,



and she was with them. The investigation of ignorant and childish behavior getting people shot continues...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #84)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:32 PM

94. And hopefully the investigation of men without permits shooting a girl in the head continues.

Yup, that's what I said. No permits, according to the defense attorneys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #94)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:31 PM

124. No permit required for private property, or rifles, in Alabama, that I can see.

 

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/alabama.pdf

What permit are you refering to ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #94)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:42 PM

125. What permits were needed? Fishing license, boat registration,

drivers license?

Or do you mean permits to purchase, own and carry a rifle in Alabama?

Non needed.

http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/p/gunlaws_al.htm

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #125)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:47 PM

128. The girl's attorney brought up the lack of a gun permit at the press conference.

So I guess we'll be hearing more about this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #12)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 04:36 PM

344. Fresh splintered wood around the door jam.

Cabin owner stated door was kicked in, windows broken, screens cut, and several power tools taken. Sherriffs say other cabins had signs of break in. So you are still fabricating lies. Please keep it up, your attempts to deflect blame from the armed burglars is as laughable as Zimmermans defenders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #344)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 02:13 PM

445. That could have happened the night before, or a few days before. And by other burglars.

The owners said they had been having ongoing problems with break-ins. If they have fingerprints, shoe prints, etc. of the teens, that would be evidence against them. But the mere fact that a door was kicked in doesn't prove who did it or when.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #445)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 04:48 PM

446. And the couples would have heard the day before

And resecured the doors and window. Now YOU cant tell a fresh break in, but the cops can. Which is why the teens were charged.
Keep spinning. The tone of desperation as you franticly grasp straws in defense of a group of armed felons has Zimmerman defender like quality to it. Quite amusing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #446)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 07:51 PM

456. Who said the couples checked all the cabins the day before? They said the only reason they heard

anything this time was because their air-conditioning happened to break down and it was quieter than usual.

I am the opposite of a Zimmerman defender. I don't think any vigilantes should be chasing down "suspicious" 17 year olds and firing in the dark.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:44 AM

2. Felony Murder rule should apply...

... if Alabama has such a law. Her accomplices who decided to commit a felony should be the ones charged with her murder, just as everyone involved in the robbery of a convenience store can be charged with murder if a death results from the crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mvccd1000 (Reply #2)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:07 AM

3. How about the guy how SHOT her?

Takes an awfully big man to be so scared that as soon as he hears/ see's something, to just blast away.
What ever happened to 'HEY, I GOT A GUN'??
And all you can come up with is that?

Blame the stupid kids, not the IDIOT who peed his pants

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:11 AM

4. paranoid gun nuts are a dime a dozen

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 09:23 AM

20. +1000 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 12:57 PM

37. +1,000,000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:37 PM

97. So are keyboard commandos that like throwing about anti-gun bigotry.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #97)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:17 PM

255. "anti-gun bigotry"? What would that be, exactly?

Do inanimate objects have some kind of rights in your world?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #255)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 10:19 PM

389. Despite your claims of ignorance, you know exactly what I'm talking about

 

It's got nothing to do with the object itself but the person in possesion of the object and you know it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #389)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 03:30 AM

403. What claims of ignorance are you refering to? You're not very coherent.

Skittles said
paranoid gun nuts are a dime a dozen

and you responded
97. So are keyboard commandos that like throwing about anti-gun bigotry.


I ask you what you mean by "anti-gun bigotry" and you reply
It's got nothing to do with the object itself but the person in possesion of the object and you know it.


So, my question is what object are you referring to? Gun? Keyboard? Both? Obviously, you agree with Skittles, that gun nuts are a dime a dozen, as you don't refute it but want to include in their numbers "keyboard commandos", whoever they may be.

Do you know what bigotry is? You might want to look it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #403)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 04:59 PM

424. Again the claimed ignorance...or maybe it's not just claimed?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #424)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 06:57 PM

427. I seek clarity and you accuse me of ignorance. LOL

Don't put that dictionary away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:04 PM

137. Welcome to the ignore list. ;)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #137)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:11 PM

139. *trumpets*

*K*

*R*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #139)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:30 PM

142. SEE #141

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #142)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:37 PM

144. no thanks but...

...be safe, never roll alone...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #144)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:38 PM

145. you know I was trained to shoot in the miliary, right?

I HAVE MY OWN BACK....but I am NOT a fucking GUN NUT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #145)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:42 PM

147. please...

...enlighten me as to relevance of this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #147)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:44 PM

148. knowing the difference between responsible gun use and gun nuttery

THAT is the relevance

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #148)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:54 PM

151. AFAIC...

...you are due a hearty *thanks* for your service.

If you are implying that the fishermen were irresponsible in their actions, I would have to agree with you. Warning shots are a bad idea often the most dangerous, especially those from a 16"/50.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #151)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:55 PM

152. OK



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #148)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 08:06 PM

378. So is knowing the difference between reasonable restrictions and gun grabbery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #145)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 08:05 PM

377. As was I.

I have my back AND yours....but I am NOT a fucking GUN GRABBER.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #145)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 08:26 PM

381. But do you shoot enough since then to keep your"skills" up to par?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #137)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:29 PM

141. aw poor BABY

soooooo SENSITIVE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #4)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 08:04 PM

376. And paranoid gun grabbers as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:01 AM

13. It was worse than that. The men chased the kids down, according to the police,

and then shot the girl in the back of the head.


"But investigators paint a different picture of the 17-year-old. They say Moody and three other juveniles were burglarizing a fish camp on the island. They were caught by three men from Mobile who chased the kids by foot. One of them pulled a gun and fired. Moody was hit in the back of the head."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #13)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:16 AM

30. If this proves to be the case, SYG doesn't apply...

...and that idiot will be facing a felony murder charge if she dies, felony assault if she (hopefully) pulls through.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #13)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 04:29 AM

213. I kind of doubt the men carded them first.

They saw armed intruders breaking in to a cabin they were caretaking. Since it was dark, they probably didnt know the adult sized males were teens. I cant find fault with them firing warning shots. They probably didnt know the girl was hiding there. And if the girl hadnt been there, committing an armed felony, she wouldnt have been shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #213)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 04:39 AM

215. No one was breaking into their own camp area, and there is nothing in the Castle Doctrine

or the Stand your ground law that says it's okay to leave your shelter and PURSUE a suspected burglar -- which these shooters apparently did, even climbing into a boat and crossing a "small river" to do so.

All we have so far is some claims -- no proof that the teens were burglarizing anything, and no proof that the girl, in particular, did anything but take a bullet in the back of her head.

You don't know that it's the girl's fault she was shot. It's equally possible (based on the little we know now), that the teens were just goofing around on the property and that three fisherman heard some sounds and -- knowing about past burglaries -- decided to go out and pursue them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #215)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 11:58 AM

253. Committing armed burglary = "goofing around"?

My youre really grasping at straws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #253)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:19 PM

271. There is no evidence yet that they were committing burglary, much less armed burglary.

Are you part of the prosecution team? In this country, everyone is innocent till proven guilty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #271)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:34 PM

284. Theres enough evidence to charge them with 1st degree burglary,

which is burglary with a weapon. They werent there eating milk and cookies while singing girl scout songs around the campfire. They were there committing armed felonies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #284)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 02:06 PM

443. Being charged with something isn't equivalent to being found guilty at trial.

That's what the trial is for -- to determine guilt. Until then, everybody involved in this case is innocent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #443)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 06:42 PM

449. you are pronouncing the adults of being

guilty of being drunk in public and being felons in possession without even the hint of evidence or charges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #449)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 07:48 PM

454. No, I'm not.

I'm asking questions about whether drinking was involved, not pronouncing guilt. (I hope the Sheriff did a blood alcohol test on anyone who used a weapon.) I also mentioned that Moody's attorney was questioning whether the adults had permits for their guns.

I never accused any adult of being a "felon in possession." You must have me mixed up with someone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #454)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 08:19 PM

459. it did come off that way

but since you were ranting about the adults' records, you seemed to assume they had them.
Yeah you mentioned that. I find it odd that Moody's lawyer does not know Alabama gun control laws. The phrase "try his case in the media" come to mind or his is not licensed in Alabama. Since none of them were arrested for violating any gun control law, it seems obvious they were legal in that regard. Their specific acts that night, may or may not be a different matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #459)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 08:37 PM

461. I guess I spoke too soon. The fishermen do have criminal records.

Are people with cocaine convictions supposed to be allowed to shoot rifles?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002590425#post4

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #213)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:23 PM

257. "I cant find fault with them firing warning shots." Really?

What do you think happens to bullets fired in warning shots? Do you think they just vaporize? Or is it fine for them to pass through some kid's head on their way back to earth?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #257)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:36 PM

258. I am amazed...


I am a, in 100% agreement with you. If they were firing 'warning shots' it should be negligent homicide

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #258)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:15 PM

269. Except the teens were armed burglars.

Warning shots showed a degree of restraint, since the law allowed them to use lethal force in defense of their life and property.The kids were armed criminals, I find it astounding all the defenders they have here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #269)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:30 PM

282. A warning shot...

is indicating you did not fear for your life. If you did you would have fired at the threat.

Depending on local law, you could argue a warning shot to scare the person off your property. In that case the shot should be into the ground immediately in front of you. Even that is not entirely safe but you would be attempting to minimize and danger. To shoot in the air, or in the general direction of people is negligent. You could hit an unintended target...

NO warning shots... NO NO NO
Shoot or do not shoot, but have a target

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #282)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:45 PM

293. Teens had a rifle, and were committing felonies.

I think many people would have shot to kill, and had legal justification to do so. The caretakers showed remarkable restraint.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #293)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 09:20 PM

383. Um...

The caretakers showed remarkable restraint.


It seems they unintentionally shot the one person who may not have been involved.
Shoot the one with the rifle

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #383)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 09:33 PM

384. She was there at the cabin during the break in.

Her boyfriend was one of the armed burglars. The law considers an accomplice, since she went there of her own free will and was present during whatever planning took place. Its going to be pretty tough making a case she was completely innocent, but hey, knock yourself out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #384)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 09:41 PM

385. I never said she was completely innocent

The stories and others here paint her as the innocent victim. I think why was she running around with armed burglars at 4a.m. is a very good question.

My point is simply no warning shots. They can have unintended consequences. Point and shout a verbal warning if you wish.
When I point a gun at a person, I have already made the decision to shoot. Their actions may stop that action before it completes, but I have it in my mind where I am placing that bullet.

A warning shot is violating what some call Rule #4: Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #385)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 10:07 PM

387. The teens were armed.

It would make sense not to confront them face to face. Yes, under Alabama law the caretakers could have shot to kill. They fired warning shots instead, and apparently one hit the girl by mistake. But she bears the responsibility. If you go around breaking into houses, theres a risk something bad will happen. It did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #385)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 05:03 PM

447. Id agree with that.

I wouldnt feel bad if they had shot at the boys and hit them. However, instead they showed restraint, either through compassion or ignorance. One of the bullets hit the hidden girl by mistake.
What cant be ignored, yet is by all the rabid anti gun zealots, is that Summer hung out with the boys all night, reasonable to assume she was present during discussions to burgle cabins. She went to the cabins with the boys. She remained at the cabin during the burglaries. She placed herself in that position. If she hadnt placed herself there, no bullet would have hit her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #447)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 06:31 PM

448. You hit on the point that people would wish away

If these kids had not gone to a place they had no business being at and had not been doing things they should not have, no shot would have been fired...

And if this girl was not in the hospital, she would be charged too.

Too many people look for reasons to absolve the initiator and blame the other side.
A 'reasonable' person would conclude that if three of four were burgling, the fourth had some involvement. Accessory at the least.
It is sad that a such a young person is so severely injured, but just because she does not fit the 'typical' profile of a criminal does not give her a free pass on her actions.

And if she dies, her three companions will justly be charged with murder. It was their actions that precipitated the situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #448)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 06:54 PM

450. Yes, I agree completely!

It appears that some posters have a stereotype criminal pictured in their mind. Summer doesnt fit that profile, so they claim she was an innocent bystander, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Those vigilante advocating posters are every bit as guilty as Zimmerman in deciding a persons guilt or innocence based on whether they fit the profile or not.
And many of those same posters have a zealous anti gun agenda... anyone who fires a gun is automatically guilty of heinous crimes against innocent people. We werent there, we dont know all the details, so it seems prudent to let Baldwin County complete their investigation and file the appropriate charges under Alabama law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #384)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 02:09 PM

444. Wrong. She wasn't an accomplice merely by being in the vicinity. No evidence

has come out that she helped in the planning or participated in any burglary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #444)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 07:08 PM

451. you think the media is going to actually

have all evidence and actually give a shit about the truth? The first is neither the State or defense will let the first happen, and you are naive if you believe the second.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #451)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 07:39 PM

453. There was a lot of wild speculation by the media in the initial reporting

which is still being repeated here, but its settled down a lot. The most accurate reporting seems to be from ch5 WKRG, and blog.al.com They seem to stick to offical reports and relevent witnesses.
The wildly inaccurate reports some posters here are promoting seem to have their origins at the local FOX station. No surprise there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #444)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 07:31 PM

452. Still pushing the dumb blonde defense?

Yes, it COULD have happened your way. Its possible that despite spending all night partying with the boys, she never participated in or overheard plans to burglarize cabins on the island. Yes, its possible she never noticed a rifle being toted around. She also had no idea the boys had left to go to the island, and just teleported herself there by coincidence. Also completely by coincidence, she accidently tresspassed onto the same private property the boys were burglarizing. She must be deaf and blind too, the poor thing, because despite being right next to the cabin, she was completely unaware of the break in the campers heard a half mile away. Yea, thats it, it could have happened that way. Good luck with your Helen Keller defense, Zimmdad, and be prepared for a great deal of ridicule.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #383)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 06:32 AM

406. And if they had shot the one with the rifle, anti's would be screaming, "Why didn't he fire

a warning shot?"

Can't win for losing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to gejohnston (Reply #260)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:47 PM

261. What goes up must come down, right?

Maybe a starting pistol for those who want to fire warning shots. I'd probably use my "loud" voice or air horn, which is enough to scare the shit out of anyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #261)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:54 PM

263. instead of a starter pistol,

an M-60 with a blank adapter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #261)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:21 PM

272. Dont break in to peoples houses, right?

If they hadnt been committing armed burglary, they wouldnt have been shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #272)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:45 PM

292. I don't know what this girl was doing.

All I know is she was shot by an idiot who claims he was firing a warning shot. If you believe that, then you understand very little about guns or basic physics.
Warning shots are appropriate when fired at sea, not in populated areas. This was not a warning shot, but a head shot. Think about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #292)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:48 PM

295. this was not a populated area

but I agree otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #295)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:52 PM

312. Apparently it was populated enough, unless he was aiming at her.

Depending on the rifle and ammo the area could be pretty damned big.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #292)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:09 PM

296. Thats utter bullshit.

First of all, I have a degree in engineering which require 4 semesters of physics with calculus. And I am experienced with firearms, even though I dont own one.
Secondly, we do know why the girl was there, because she made a series of increasingly bad decisions that put her there. She lied to her mom. She was out all night with 3 boys "partying", doing drugs and drinking in teen lingo. They had a rifle. They went to the island to break into the cabins. At any point, she could have said leave me here and not continued. She could have called her parents. She could have called 911 to report a crime in progress. She did not. She was a willing accomplice.
Thirdly, there is no evidence supporting your wild claim that she was targeted with a head shot. Sherriffs report says two warning shots were fired, one struck the hiding girl by accident. Alabama law permitted lethal force in protecting life and property, caretakers appear to have used restraint in not intending to hit the burglars.

It is unfortunate the girl is gravely injured, but it was her poor decisions that placed her there. Decisions that she, not others, bear responsibility for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #296)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:33 PM

306. You don't know she was "drinking and doing drugs." There has been absolutely nothing in the press

to support that. But you're fine with libeling the victim who is struggling for her life now.

And you don't know that she didn't ask the boys to take her home. She might have been in the bushes because she did NOT want to be involved in the crime. Do you really not understand that cell phones don't work in every isolated place in the country? How was she supposed to call her parents to get her? When the shooters wanted help for her, they couldn't call for it -- they had to load her in the boat and take her away from the island.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #306)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:47 PM

310. Sherriffs report says they were partying.

I doubt he meant they were cooking s'mores over the campfire and singing girl scout songs. "Partying", in kids lingo means drinking and doing drugs.

If she didnt want to commit the crimes, she could have stayed back at the beach, or not gone to the island in the first place.

Police were summoned to the island by some method. I assume by cell phone. Of course, if you want to argue police were summoned by smoke signals, ill just chaulk it up as another wild fabrication of yours.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #310)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:50 PM

326. I already explained this to you. The gunmen had to load the girl up in their boat and take her off

the Island because there was no way-- on that isolated Island -- to summon the police or 911 for help. So she couldn't have used any phone to call her parents, either.

Most of the Island is Federal property, so there would be nothing illegal about a simple plan to go hang out there. What would be illegal would be trespassing on private property, as the police allege that they eventually did.

You think the "partying" teens must have been drinking and using drugs? I think it's just as likely that the gunmen (or "gentlemen," as the sheriff would say) -- had been drinking alcohol and using drugs. There they were out at their camping area, drinking, and they suddenly heard noises on the other end of the Island, so they decided it would be a good idea to go all commando-style -- hop into a boat, cross the river, and chase the bandits down, guns blazing.

Aren't you at all curious who the gunmen were? Whether any of those men had records? Whether any of them had been drinking? If any of them did anything that contributed to this horrible tragedy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #326)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 04:16 PM

336. More of your fabrications, huh?

Sherriffs report says kids were partying. Sherriffs report says nothing about the men drinking, so thats a lie youre telling.

Gravine Island is upriver a bit from Mobile, probably well in cell range. The island is accessable only by boat. So of course she had to be removed by boat. Whose boat I havent read. Do you have a link to your claim the men removed her? ... Or is this yet another of your wild fabrications?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #336)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 04:32 PM

341. I'm not telling a lie, I'm saying that there is a possibility that the gunmen were drinking,

and that that is something the defense attorney also wants investigated.

And I'm not fabricating anything. We have a limited set of facts. You're using them to smear the teens before trial. I'm saying the same set of facts could just as easily condemn the gunmen. It is too early to tell, and we may never know because the sheriff and DA don't seem to be inclined to take this (a case against the shooters) much further.

Here's a link to where it says the shooters loaded the girl into their boat:

http://blog.al.com/live/2012/04/shot_teen_summer_moody_still_a.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #310)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 06:14 AM

404. So, teenagers "partying" is now a crime punishable by extralegal summary execution?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #404)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 09:42 AM

411. It cannot be ignored as one of several increasingly bad decisions she made that night

that resulted in her being shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #296)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:33 PM

307. I guess you slept through the lesson on gravity

I'm sure your parenting advice is very sound and nobody is condoning what these kids were up to. The issue here is not about them, it's about so-called hunters firing "warning shots". No such thing as a safe warning shot, except in the open ocean or maybe the desert. If she dies, regardless of Alabama law, this will be a negligent homicide. BTW, I have no issue with hunters, rifles or self defense, just blatant stupidity and negligence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #307)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:49 PM

311. Alabama law permits a lethal shot.

So your arguement is pointless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #311)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:00 PM

313. Alabama permits a "lethal shot" against whom?

Cite me the law that permits shooting unarmed girls in the head, or discharging firearms recklessly. Or are you claiming this was fired intentionally by someone who feared the girl was a threat to his life?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #257)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:05 PM

267. Alabama law allowed them to shoot to kill.

They fired warning shots instead. And since the teens were armed, it wouldnt have been prudent to confront them. Warning shots to chase them away seems quite reasonable, under the circumstances.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #267)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:22 PM

273. Not according to two local criminal defense attorneys who were interviewed in this case.

Alabama law does not allow people to shoot at RETREATING people who are no threat to them. She was shot in the back of the head -- obviously no threat.

The shooters pursued the teens, not the other way around -- as you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #273)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:29 PM

280. They werent aiming at her.

And the Alabama law, posted at the bottom of the thread, clearly states lethal force is legal in defense of life AND property. The men fired two warning shots against armed intruders. A restrained response under the circumstances. There is no evidence they were aiming at the girl, or even knew she was there. If she hadnt been an accomplice to armed burglary, she wouldnt have een shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #280)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:39 PM

289. It isn't DEFENSE to shoot people in the back or in the back of the neck.

It isn't DEFENSE to shoot at anyone who is no threat to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #289)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:14 PM

298. Alabama law allows it to protect life AND property.

Caretakers showed restraint in not shooting at anyone. Warning shot in response to boys hit girl in hiding. If she hadnt made the decision to be an accomplice to armed burglary, she wouldnt have been hit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #298)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:25 PM

302. The Alabama criminal attorneys who were interviewed on TV said that isn't true. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #302)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:16 PM

315. Then they didnt read the law.

Its posted down thread. Seems clear on the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #315)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:46 PM

324. There's nothing in that law that says it's okay to shoot bystanders in the back of the head.

And there's been no evidence produced by the sheriff or DA showing that she had any involvement in any thefts.

What we DO know is that there's no cell service on the Island, so that she couldn't have called for help even if she wanted to go home. And we know most of the Island is Federal property, and that until the teens went onto private property (assuming they did), they were within their rights to be on the Island.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #324)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 05:17 PM

352. She wasnt a bystander, she was committing armed felonies.

Just because she wasnt holding the gun or kicking in the door doesnt mean she was innocent. The driver and lookouts for bank robbers are just as guilty as the guys who enter. She was there at the scene, therefore she was a participant.

And yes, she was breaking the law just being on the island, she was drinking and using drugs. And we dont even know if the island had a closing time. If so, as many state and national parks do, then they were tresspassing just being on the island.

She went looking for a thrill. Unfortunately she found it in spades. But she bears the responsibility for her actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #352)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 05:40 PM

360. She wasn't armed. And there's been no evidence showing she was an accomplice.

I was next to a girl in a store once who decided to slip something in her pocket. That didn't make me her accomplice. By your standards, if the store people had caught her, they should have arrested me.

You don't know she was drinking and using drugs. Why do you keep saying that? And she wasn't breaking the law being on Federal property -- which most of the Island is. Since the shooters had to take her off the Island to get medical attention, it isn't even clear where the shooting took place.

The teens do bear responsibility for their actions. But so should the adult shooters, who haven't even been named in the press yet. Why not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #360)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 06:36 PM

367. If she commits a felony with others who are armed,

She is considered under law as also being armed. She went to the cabin with the boys, that makes her an accomplice. If she survives, she will also be charged with 1st degree burglary.

Caretakers not charged because nothing uncovered in investigation shows they broke the law. Teens were charged because investigation shows they broke the law. Seems like a simple enough concept.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #267)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:26 PM

276. warning shots are reasonable only if

in a very rural area, you fire in the ground and you know exactly where the bullet is going to hit the ground.
Never in an urban area
Never fire in the air even out in the sticks. Even as improbable as it is, the possibility still exists of it landing on an innocent human or pet someplace else.
There are no loopholes in the law of gravity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #267)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:29 PM

279. Where does it say they were armed

and if they were, what kind of warning shot hits the back of a girl's head? Whatever the kids were doing, this is a clear case of negligent aggravated assault with a firearm by the shooter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #279)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:40 PM

291. Sherriffs report says teens were armed with a rifle.

And the warning shots (2) were fired in response to the boys. The caretakers probably didnt see the girl. If they werent aiming to hit the boys, it doesnt stand to reason that they would deliberately aim at the girl.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #291)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:59 PM

328. Have you seen the sheriff's report? I wasn't aware one had been released. I'd love to see the names

of the gunmen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #328)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 04:41 PM

346. Excerpts are posted within the thread.

Not that Id expect you to read them. Youve deliberately ignored all other evidence thats been posted in your lame attempt at claiming armed burglars are "innocent".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #346)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 05:14 PM

351. I repeatedly gave you links when you asked for them. I've seen no link to an actual

sheriff's report, so would you please show me? And you haven't answered -- did the report contain the shooters' names?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #351)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 06:47 PM

371. Repeatedly? Bwahaha. I only asked once.

I cant cut and paste links via my phone. However, I did tell you that there were excerpts from the sherriffs reports in this thread. You shouldnt have any problem finding them. AFAIK, the entire report hasnt been released. Also, AFAIK the names of the caretakers havent been released. I guess DA might be worried about threats and harassment from hysterical defenders of armed burglars; who, it would appear, expected the caretakers to roll out the red carpet for burglars, serve them tea and scones, and help them carry their loot to the boat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #351)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 07:48 PM

374. Sherriffs statements and/or links

Posts OP, 31, 35 (satellite photo/map), 67, 74. Law quoted posts 240, 364, excerpts and links posts 299, 316.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #279)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:46 PM

294. I'm guessing

if it was a warning shot, the shooter aimed off to the side in the bushes, or in the air at a very high angle.
Personally, don't think it was a warning shot. The cops charged the kids with first degree burglary because one of them was armed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #294)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:23 PM

300. I havent seen those details.

On ballistics, etc. But warning shots seem very plausible to me. Cabin was unoccupied, probably little of value inside. Caretakers go there to investigate sounds of break in, see armed burglars. Makes sense to fire a warning shot to chase them away, than to confront armed burglars face to face.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #267)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 03:08 AM

402. "And since the teens were armed, it wouldnt have been prudent to confront them."

That's a contradiction. If they did not confront them, how would they have known they were armed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #402)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 10:53 AM

413. Its rather difficult to conceal a rifle in your pocket.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #413)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 08:32 PM

432. The fishermen's own attorney doesn't say anything about being afraid because the teens had weapons.

He says the fishermen shot at the teens to stop them from running away.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002585410#post3

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 09:43 AM

22. Oh, you mean...

... the guy who was peacefully snoozing in his fishing shack, studiously NOT out illegally drinking and committing felonies at 4am? Right... why SHOULDN'T we blame the crime victim in this case? He should have known there would be some felons in his midst that morning and carefully prepared his interview questions so he could determine if they posed a threat or not.

If they had happened to be drug smugglers coming through his camp and decided to harm or kill him, at least he could have died honorably, knowing he had not fired in haste.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mvccd1000 (Reply #22)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:03 PM

38. or perhaps the guy who pursued and shot her in the back of the head?

yes, by all means defend yourself, but it turns to OFFENSE the moment someone decides to pursue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mvccd1000 (Reply #22)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:22 PM

43. No, the guys who chased the kids on foot and shot one of them in the back of the head.

And how do you know the adults hadn't been drinking?

From the link at the OP:

"But investigators paint a different picture of the 17-year-old. They say Moody and three other juveniles were burglarizing a fish camp on the island. They were caught by three men from Mobile who chased the kids by foot. One of them pulled a gun and fired. Moody was hit in the back of the head."


Here's something from today:

http://www2.wkrg.com/news/2012/apr/17/summer-moody-update-ar-3623945/

Attorney Robert Stankowski says the family is frustrated about how Summer is being portrayed in this case, when there is no evidence at this point that she did anything wrong.

"We certainly have a lot of questions involved about whether or not the use of deadly force would have been appropriate under these circumstances. What these men were doing out there when they were firing these shots, whether or not alcohol was involved, whether or not these men put themselves in the zone of danger and created this situation," says attorney Robert Stankowski.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:04 PM

87. Really?

 

There is no way I would ever give up my position in MY home to inform someone who is illeagly breaking in that I have a gun. Hello they made the desision to go into someone else's property. They started the chain events which they now have to deal with along with the innocent ppl in the home.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Brkh (Reply #87)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:15 AM

156. The shooter wasn't in his home or even in his fishing camp. He followed the teens in a boat.

=http://www.local15tv.com/news/local/story/Teens-Charged-as-Adults-in-Gravine-Island/xOzHljVPvU68nIGBwSDu9Q.cspx

(BALDWIN COUNTY, Ala.) - Three teenage boys are now being charged as adults in connection with burglaries on Gravine Island. Another teenager, Summer Moody, 17, was shot during the incident by someone at a fish camp there.

The whole thing started around 4 a.m. Sunday. Baldwin County Sheriffs Deputies say Scott Byrd, Daniel Parnell and Dillon Tyree, all 17, along with Moody went to Gravine Island and broke into several fish camps there.

Three men on the island heard the teens breaking into one fish camp, deputies say those men had to cross a small river to get to the fish camp where the teens were. They began shooting. Moody was hit in the back of the head. She remains in critical condition at USA Medical Center.

Deputies say Byrd, Tyree and Parnell are now being charged as adults because they had a weapon when they were committing the burglaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #3)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 06:12 PM

365. During the commission of a crime...

...the perps are responsible for all related injuries or deaths. How about we blame the criminals for breaking into occupied buildings instead, hmmm?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mvccd1000 (Reply #2)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:56 AM

11. I don't see evidence that they actually committed a felony. The only one who I'm sure did so

is the one who chased her, according to police, and shot her in the back of the head.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:39 PM

99. The only one who I'm sure did so is the one who chase her

 

Sure huh? Must be nice to be all seeing and all knowing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #99)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:40 PM

100. The only fact we know is that someone shot her in the back of the head.

Everything else is still up for grabs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #11)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:41 AM

184. Sherriffs say the teens were breaking and entering. Thats a felony.

And sherriffs say one of the teens was armed. They werent innocent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #184)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:44 AM

185. Has the rule of "innocent until proven guilty" been repealed?

They are still innocent because they haven't been proven guilty.

OTOH, so is the shooter -- the guy who supposedly heard some noises on the other side of the island, left his campsite, got into a boat, crossed a river, chased the teens on foot, and shot the girl in the back of the head. He's innocent, too -- whoever he is. For some reason, the police aren't naming any of the adults so far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #185)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:55 AM

189. Innocent until proven guilty applies to a court of law.

Not posters on a message board. We dont know all the facts, but according to the sherriffs report they were committing multiple felonies while armed. And they were old enough to know better.Its too bad they did something so stupid, but that doesnt mean they were innocent. If the yoing woman had been spending the night with a friend, as she told her mom, instead of committing armed burgleries with some boys... well, we wouldnt be having this discussion now, would we?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #189)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:23 PM

274. If the gunmen hadn't heard some sounds, and decided to cross a river to get to them,

and fired off shots at head level in the darkness when they got to the other side, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #274)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:36 PM

308. Still making shit up, huh?

No mention is made in report of what angle the warning shot was fired at. So you are fabricating that. And your big river, is in fact a small stream next to the caretakers cabin. Its right there in plain sight in satellite photo this thread.At the time the caretakers left their cabin and crossed the stream, they were still just investigating sounds from the other cabin, not persuing the teens. Try sticking to the facts in the sherriffs report rather than wild fabrications attempting to deflect responsibility away from armed burglars. You are sounding like the Zimmerman defenders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #308)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 05:20 PM

354. You're the one sounding like a Zimmerman defender. He's the vigilante, just like

these shooters appear to have been.

The sheriff's deputy on TV said the shooters were "chasing" the teens "on foot." That means they were pursuing them. Try sticking to the facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #354)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 06:39 AM

407. What happened to your staunch defense of "innocent until proven guilty"?

Seems to me it works one way with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #274)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 08:08 PM

379. If the kids had not been drunk and breaking in...

we would not be having this conversation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #379)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 11:22 PM

392. I challenge you to show me a single media report that the teens were drunk.

I haven't seen any reports that they were drinking, period -- though, since THEY weren't the ones who shot someone in the head, I wouldn't care if they were.

I would like to know the drug/alcohol levels of the "gentlemen" shooters, however.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #392)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 10:58 AM

414. It's in the same report you keep citing that the fishermen were probably drunk

How could you miss it?

You keep posting about how the fishermen were probably drinking and impaired but somehow the "teens" partying doesn't indicate any evidence of alcohol or drug use.

I'm sure the report on the "innocent until proven guilty" teens drug and alcohol use is in the same source about the "guilty until proven guilty again and executed" report on the fishermen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #414)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 01:35 PM

417. It's the possible drinking of the shooters that is relevant, not of the teen victim.

You don't get to kill a seventeen year old because she's been drinking.

All my comments about the possible behavior of the shooters were made in the context of the many people here who have been busy condemning the teens before a trial, and don't seem to care that we still don't even know the names of the fisherman, or whether any of them had a criminal record, or were involved in activities that made them act recklessly or impaired their judgment.

The real victim here is the girl, not these men or the stuff they thought they had to run across the island to protect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #417)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 01:48 PM

418. you don't get the context

You don't get to kill a seventeen year old because she's been drinking.

she wasn't shot because she was drinking. Most likely, it was a warning shot gone bad. It is still under investigation.
All my comments about the possible behavior of the shooters were made in the context of the many people here who have been busy condemning the teens before a trial, and don't seem to care that we still don't even know the names of the fisherman, or whether any of them had a criminal record, or were involved in activities that made them act recklessly or impaired their judgment.

Our comments about the kids are based on evidence in the stories. They have been charged with felonies. That is not the same as speculating. We know the fishermen do not have criminal records because they were not arrested and charged for gun possession. What part of Federal Firearms Act of 1938 and Gun Control Act of 1968 don't you get?
The real victim here is the girl, not these men or the stuff they thought they had to run across the island to protect.

We don't even know if the bullet came from any of their guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #418)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 08:31 PM

431. Here's a link to information from one of the fishermen's attorneys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mvccd1000 (Reply #2)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:50 PM

106. If the kids had been armed, maybe.

I don't think we charge pranksters, or unarmed burglars with felony murder. Maybe stupidity, but not murder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #106)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:45 AM

186. Sherriffs say one of them was armed.

Breaking and entering while armed? I dont think theyd find much sympathy from any jury. Kids do stupid shit, sometimes it blows up in their face.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mvccd1000 (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 10:56 PM

439. Felony Murder is from Common Law


. . . and if you ask me, it's one of the most barbaric holdovers from that age. I'm certain the family would feel no better if prosecutors tried to pin this on somebody other than the shooter. Nor should they.

Perhaps it'll come out that the shooter was innocent, but in the meantime, don't go back to the age of the Divine Right of Kings just to pull out a law that pins the death on a person one who had no criminal intent toward the deceased.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to caseymoz (Reply #439)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 12:50 AM

440. And if you ask me...

... it makes a great deal of sense. If you get together with a group of your buddies and decide to go hold up a gas station (or burglarize a fishing camp), and one of the patrons, or an innocent bystander, or even one of your cohorts is killed during the commission of your crime, every one of you who conspired to commit the crime are guilty of causing that death. It's absolutely correct to charge all of you with manslaughter, or murder, or negligent homicide, or whatever charges fit the situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mvccd1000 (Reply #440)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 02:06 AM

441. However, statutory and case law says . . .

Last edited Fri Apr 20, 2012, 03:30 AM - Edit history (1)


. . . unless the crime is in progress when they shot, Felony Murder cannot apply. At that time, there was no crime in progress. The shooters seem to agree that they did not fire to stop a crime. The crime had already been abandoned.

But back on the topic, the basis of modern criminal law is intent. The key to 14th century law was sin. If you sin, it means that God is frowning on everything else you do. Anything bad that happens due to your sin is your fault, no matter how random the occurrence might have been. So, if you're into second-guessing the mind of God, and if you want to throw us back into a theocracy without really trying, Felony Murder is a good way to start.

If, on the other hand, you want to create another charge for inciting gunfire or initiating a gunfight, whatever, and then add a degree of manslaughter to the criminal who starts it by shooting or through some other felony when an innocent bystander is randomly killed, I'd agree.

But Felony Murder is fucked. It's like running a traffic light and then have a speeding charge added to it, because, of course, you had to have been speeding if you ran the light.

It might seem a subtle difference to you, but I don't like the circumvention of criminal intent Felony Murder entails. Manslaughter, at least takes into account irresponsibility and/or negligence, and gives the proper consideration in sentencing. We don't need to reach back to the Stone Age.

And believe me, in Alabama, if they could hit these alleged burglars with Felony Murder, they would. It's common law, so it's available.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mvccd1000 (Reply #440)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 07:54 PM

457. I agree.

If its common law, as the other poster says, then it must have worked pretty well the past 800 years, or we would have abandoned it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to caseymoz (Reply #439)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 07:50 PM

455. What is barbaric about Felony Murder?

If you dont commit a felony, theres zero chance of being charged with felony murder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:27 AM

6. Anotheer innocent victim sacrificed the the gun gods.

This is the ugly side of gun worship fostered by the NRA, the GOP and so-called RKBA advocates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 10:54 AM

29. Thieves==innocent?

 

Wow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SATIRical (Reply #29)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:27 PM

45. How do we know they were thieves, and not just kids messing around

in a campsite?

We don't have any facts yet, except for the fact that a girl was shot IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD.

And the police say the men "chased" the kids on foot, before someone shot her.

We also don't know if the men were drinking or not. A bunch of men are out camping and fishing and there's no beer involved? Okay, maybe . . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #45)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:37 PM

59. "The juveniles were charged with third-degree burglary"

 

We don't know for sure. But the police had enough to charge them and I'm just going by what the article says. If you don't believe the article, then the girl wasn't necessarily shot, there weren't necessarily guns involved, and the camp doesn't necessarily even exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SATIRical (Reply #59)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:40 PM

60. Yes, they were charged, based on what the shooters told them. But it wouldn't

be the first time the police made a mistake.

I hope the police were smart enough to get blood alcohol levels from the shooters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #60)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:59 PM

66. Based on what the shooters told them?

 

What makes you think that? What makes you think that is all the evidence there was?

A girl was shot in the back of the head. Some reports say the shooters chased the kids (so there wouldn't be there in the camp). Why in the world would they just believe the shooters? That makes no sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SATIRical (Reply #66)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 04:56 PM

71. I agree, it would make no sense for the police or anyone else

to just take the shooters' word for it that the kids were breaking in and the shooters did nothing wrong.

But that's what appears to have happened -- at least with a number of DUers right here.

But you're sure the police wouldn't have just arrested the kids based on what the shooters said? Ever hear of George Zimmerman? The police sure wanted to take him at his word.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #71)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:35 PM

83. No, it doesn't appear that is what happened

 

remember, there were three other witnesses besides the girl.

The cops had to weigh all of the evidence. Just as they did in the Zimmerman case, where there was really only one witness left alive. As more evidence came out, they eventually charged him.

In this case, there was apparently enough evidence from the get-go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #45)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:43 PM

103. When I go camping and fishing I NEVER take along beer.

 

NEVER but I ALWAYS take along a gun. Never know about bears.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #103)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:16 AM

157. Do you think most groups of men never take beer? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #157)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:37 AM

166. I don't think "most" groups of anyone ever do anything.

 

I don't stereotype.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SATIRical (Reply #29)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:01 PM

92. So Thieves should be SHOT?

Right?
A life for STUFF?

Pretty sick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #92)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:35 PM

96. Amazing, isn't it? The gun owner as judge, jury, and executioner -- all over some stuff. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #92)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:39 PM

146. I gather you are not a big fan of Castle Doctrine?

Its the law in 44 states

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #146)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:19 AM

158. Not if it means appointing to yourself the power of judge, jury, and executioner

if you decide someone is threatening someone's property.

Do you really think the Castle Doctrine applies here? The shooter's home wasn't invaded. The shooter heard noises on the other side of a river, and got in a boat to follow the sounds -- then came out shooting.


http://www.local15tv.com/news/local/story/Teens-Charged-as-Adults-in-Gravine-Island/xOzHljVPvU68nIGBwSDu9Q.cspx

(BALDWIN COUNTY, Ala.) - Three teenage boys are now being charged as adults in connection with burglaries on Gravine Island. Another teenager, Summer Moody, 17, was shot during the incident by someone at a fish camp there.

The whole thing started around 4 a.m. Sunday. Baldwin County Sheriffs Deputies say Scott Byrd, Daniel Parnell and Dillon Tyree, all 17, along with Moody went to Gravine Island and broke into several fish camps there.

Three men on the island heard the teens breaking into one fish camp, deputies say those men had to cross a small river to get to the fish camp where the teens were. They began shooting. Moody was hit in the back of the head. She remains in critical condition at USA Medical Center.

Deputies say Byrd, Tyree and Parnell are now being charged as adults because they had a weapon when they were committing the burglaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #158)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:25 AM

160. Again I was replying to the broad statement, which I read as not limited to the specifics of this

event.

It is also up to 1st degree burglary since they were armed.

There is still a lot more to come out on this...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #160)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:31 AM

163. "Armed" could mean one of them had a pocket knife.

It also could mean one of them grabbed a gun he found in one of the buildings.

You're right. There's a lot more to come out in this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #163)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:50 AM

167. What I read was that the young people had brought a firearm with them

and that was why the charges were raised to 1st degree burglary.

It will be interesting to see what tomorrow brings on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #167)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:58 AM

168. Yup. And, like I said, I'd like to see some of the adults' names.

Why haven't they been made public?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #168)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:03 AM

171. They will have to be at some point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #146)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 04:20 AM

212. HE WASN'T BEING THREATENED WHEN HE SHOT @ THEM

You people seem to want to twist everything.
How in the world is it right for a kid to be brain dead over STUFF?

That is the question, not the castle doctrine

So YOU believe that its fine to take a life over your fishing pole?
Thats what you are saying

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #212)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 04:47 AM

217. The teens were armed.

That would seem to indicate a threat, since one cant really tell if they are fleeing, or seeking cover to fire. It was dark, the men probably didnt know they were teens, and didnt know the girl was hiding in the underbrush. Their intent was to scare away armed intruders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #217)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 05:02 AM

222. That hasn't been proven. And the "weapon" hasn't even been named.

The girl, in any case, wasn't armed.

The shooters weren't threatened. They left their shelter NOT because they saw armed people, but because they heard some noises. After they crossed the "small river" they purposely pursued the teens. Except for the racial issue, this case is very similar to the Trayvon Martin case. Vigilante justice. Or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #222)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 11:42 AM

250. Sherriffs say teens had a rifle.

It doesnt matter if she was armed or not, her crime partners were, so law considers her as committing armed felonies.

And I fail to see any similarity whatsoever with Trayvon Martin. Trayvon didnt lie to his parents about his whereabouts. Trayvon was not out at 4am doing drugs and drinking. Trayvon was entitled to be where he was. Trayvon wasnt armed. Trayvon wasnt committing felonies.
Summer lied to her pare.ts. She was out at 4am doing drugs and drinking. She and her friends were tresspassing. They were armed. They were committing multiple felonies.
OK, I will grant you that both were 17 years old. Other than that there is no similarity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #217)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 06:52 AM

225. uh-huh, and you know this how?

and he knew this how?

So, you would shoot someone RUNNING away from you?

Why?, for what purpose?

There is NO WAY you can justify shooting FLEEING kids.

Now bring up something else that muddies the waters, that is what you all do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #225)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 09:44 AM

233. Report in the media about why the charges were raised to 1st degree

As of now, the shooting is being considered accidental and associated with the 4 people doing criminal mischief. The Georgia felony murder rule may kick in for the other three.
.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #225)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 11:50 AM

252. Sherriffs report says the teens had a gun.

Which is why the charges against them were upgraded from 3rd to 1st degree burglary. Sometimes kids do stupid shit that results in serious injury or death. They were old enough to know better, and bear the responsibility for their actions. If the girl had been spending the night with her friend, as she told her mom, instead of doing drugs, drinking, and committing armed felonies, then she wouldnt have been shot, and we wouldnt be having this conv ersation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #252)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 06:24 AM

405. The victim DID NOT have a gun.

And there's no suggestion that she did any drugs or broke into any cabins.

You think that a teenager hanging out with other teenagers is a crime punishable by extralegal summary execution? You're so intent on having the victim pay for her crimes, how about the shooters? Do they bare no responsibility?

Oh, right. THEY were carrying guns. No responsibility required.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #405)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 10:35 AM

412. Doesnt matter if she was holding a gun.

If she was a participant in the burglaries, and there is zero evidence that she wasnt, then the fact that one of the gang was armed means all the gang is guilty of armed burglary. That is the law, that is why all three boys are charged as adults with 1st degree burglary, and the girl will be also when she recovers. The girl was hanging out with the boys all night. It is reasonable to assume she was present during plans to burglarize the cabins. She was present at the scenes of the burglaries. That makes her guilty of the same charges, just as a lookout for armed bank robbers is also considered guilty of armed robbery even if unarmed and not inside the bank.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #212)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 09:41 AM

232. You posted a general comment and got a general reply

Based on what I read being said as I post this (wed early AM), the shooting looks to be accidental though associated with the criminal mischief she and 3 others were doing. That may trigger Felony Murder rule for her associated.

Again, based on what I have read so far, I am on the fence about this one. I don't see any innocents or heroes with good judgement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DiverDave (Reply #92)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 10:25 AM

242. Who said that? I certainly didn't.

 

I simply pointed out that they were charged as thieves. They may be proven innocent, but right now it doesn't appear that way.

On edit: But on a larger philosophical point, if it is a life for "stuff" (which it may or may not have been from the shooters perspective), why do criminals make that decision. Knowing there is a chance they will get shot in robbing someone, why would they make that choice. If they think their life is worth less than stuff, who are you to argue with them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SATIRical (Reply #29)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:51 PM

107. Please indicate where the story says that the innocent victim was a thief.

The shooters were afraid, so they shot blindly into the dark.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #107)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:08 AM

173. If the shooters were afraid, why did they leave their own camp,

get in a boat, row it across the river, get out of the boat, and chase the teens down?

Sounds like plain old vigilante justice to me . . . more and more it sounds like another high-profile case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #173)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 06:55 AM

226. Their guns were magical talismans protecting them from the demons in the night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #173)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:02 PM

265. Do you have a link for this?

 

I haven't seen the "get in their boat" part. I was under the impression they (fisherman) were already on the island to one of the camps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinniSkipper (Reply #265)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:26 PM

275. Here's a link.

I can't find the one where I saw a reference to a boat, but they crossed a "small river" somehow. So unless they swam it. . . .

http://www.local15tv.com/news/local/story/Teens-Charged-as-Adults-in-Gravine-Island/xOzHljVPvU68nIGBwSDu9Q.cspx

(BALDWIN COUNTY, Ala.) - Three teenage boys are now being charged as adults in connection with burglaries on Gravine Island. Another teenager, Summer Moody, 17, was shot during the incident by someone at a fish camp there.

The whole thing started around 4 a.m. Sunday. Baldwin County Sheriffs Deputies say Scott Byrd, Daniel Parnell and Dillon Tyree, all 17, along with Moody went to Gravine Island and broke into several fish camps there.

Three men on the island heard the teens breaking into one fish camp, deputies say those men had to cross a small river to get to the fish camp where the teens were. They began shooting. Moody was hit in the back of the head. She remains in critical condition at USA Medical Center.

Deputies say Byrd, Tyree and Parnell are now being charged as adults because they had a weapon when they were committing the burglaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #107)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 10:26 AM

244. Right after you indicate where in the story the teens were innocent

 

I saw that they were charged as thieves. They may indeed be innocent but right now it doesn't appear that way. The story indicates the opposite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 12:30 PM

36. Kicking in doors on other people's property is "innocent" to you?

Interesting interpretation of the law you have.

Here's a hint. Leave other people and their stuff alone and you most likely won't get shot. I'm not sure if that's directly from the NRA or my grandmother, but it's good advice either way.

But some people are already over extending the entire Martin-Zimmerman incident and over reaching by trying to make it look like every shooting involving anyone under 26 is another SYG horror story.

Here's a hint. If you want to exploit it, at least choose incidents where people aren't committing felonies at the time they are shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #36)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:19 PM

42. Chasing down suspected burglars on foot and shooting them in the back of the head

is okay with you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #42)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:26 PM

58. As soon as we know if that actually happened we'll talk - or were you actually there?

If you were there we'd like to hear the details.

Otherwise you're going on a short and poorly written newspaper story that reported what someone said, very possibly one of the "doorkickers" with every reason to try and cover their ass. You're guessing at what happened and automatically making the men in the house broken into the bad guys.

Nothing like a semi informed rush to judgement. Shall we bother with arraignment and a trial, or just get the torches and pitchforks out from the last few weeks and relight them?

Two weeks ago, here in Chicago an 80 year old man shot and killed a 19 year old that broke into his home. No charges were filed against the homeowner. Even in hoplophobic Chicago, he was considered within his rights.

Right now nobody seems to know jack shit for facts in this case, just like in Florida. Not that lack of facts stopped anyone from speculating out their ass.

So let's wait to see what the facts actually are and minimize the risk of at least one or more of us looking really stupid.

If they did "chase them down" it's a crime for the shooter, probably manslaughter or assault.

OTOH if they shot them after they kicked down the door and didn't really "chase them", the "doorkickers" are most likely guilty of felony murder or at minimum B&E, assault and trespass, depending on whether the woman lives.

No matter how you look at it, they weren't "innocent" which by definition means doing nothing wrong.

Forensics will likely tell us what really happened more accurately and honestly than either side of the story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #58)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:21 PM

81. Here's an interview with some investigator, where he says the teens were chased.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #36)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:55 PM

108. So, if the person standing next to you commits a crime, you should be punished for it?



Collective punishment is ALWAYS a good idea - in fascist countries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #108)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:00 PM

111. they do in France

The asshole driver starts waving a pistol around, and everyone in the car could be going to prison. Unjust and wrong, I agree but France is hardly fascist, unless you are Roma.
“If the evidence points to her involvement, she will be prosecuted,” the source told The Sun, “Anybody involved in the illegal use of a handgun in public is liable to arrest and interrogation.”

If the gun proves to be real, all parties face up to seven years in prison. Even if it’s fake, the passengers in the car could get two years in the clink.


http://news.yahoo.com/pippa-middleton-may-face-jail-time-gun-incident-135203320.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #111)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:21 PM

119. The only people waiving guns around were the yahoos in the cabin.

And last time I checked Alabama ain't in France, dumbass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #119)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:30 PM

123. you missed the point

you said
Collective punishment is ALWAYS a good idea - in fascist countries.

This Brit and other passengers are going to jail because the asshole driver was waving a pistol around in Paris. That is collective punishment. You were implying that there was collective punishment in this Alabama case. This case in Paris is a specific example of collective punishment in a free country unless of course you happen to be Roma, Muslim, Scientology.
Collective punishment ain't in Alabama, but is in France.
Oh yeah, "ain't" isn't a word.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #119)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:27 AM

161. Police are now stating that the young people had a gun with them

No details on what kind and where it was at the time. I do not believe that was available information when you posted.

As for France vs Alabama, the people are nicer in Alabama, even if they still have dry counties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #161)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:10 AM

174. I've only heard the word "weapon" used. Have you seen an actual claim of a gun?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #174)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:28 AM

177. Yes...to deal with gators vice armed robbery.

http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/usatoday/article/39062027?odyssey=mod

7th paragraph:

Baldwin County Sheriff's office spokesman Maj. Anthony Lowery said it is believed the youths had gone to the island to dig for frogs and shoot alligators and had a firearm for that purpose.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #177)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:45 AM

187. Interesting, thanks. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:42 PM

101. Good for a laugh as always

 

NOT. Take a look at your post, this is the ugly side (only side) of an anti-gun zealots bigotry, fostered by who knows what.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #101)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:59 PM

109. You're right - murder is very rarely "funny".

People who believe the gun-worshiper dogma that guns are the first and only solution to every problem leave a whole lot of bodies in their wake.

Not funny at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:30 AM

7. Wow, what a loss for her friends and family.

I don't own a gun and don't ever plan to, but if I felt threatened, I would use deadly force. I am a survivor of domestic violence and think that you have a right to defend yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:40 AM

8. Burglary, eh?

Sounds like those boys have some murder charges on their hands. (The thieves, not the shooters, not enough detail to know about that.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Callisto32 (Reply #8)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:18 AM

197. The shooters should be looking at murder charges. What gave them the right,

when they heard suspicious sounds, to leave their own camp, get in a boat, cross a river, chase the teens down and shoot a girl in the back of the head?

I can't believe the attitudes I'm seeing here.

The only FACT we know for sure is that a 17 year old was shot in the back of the head. (In a moral world, that would be awfully hard to justify.)

Everything else is just allegation and supposition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #197)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 08:38 AM

228. Whoa, whoa, whoa...

What attitude?

All I said was that it looks like felony murder for the burglars, and I don't know about the shooters.

If you feel like pulling up the state statute for homicide in the appropriate jurisdiction, and matching all of the elements of that to known facts about the shooters, and eliminating any possible justification defenses; knock yourself out.

I do that stuff for a living, and have no desire to do it here.

Don't put words in my mouth OR attitudes in my heart...

Due Process FTMFW.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #197)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:33 PM

318. Alabama law gives them the right.

And since the teens were armed, on drugs, and committing felonies, any reasonable jury would agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:41 AM

9. And why is this guy not being charged with murder?

He shot an innocent girl in the back as she ran away and he walks free?!?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SaltyBro (Reply #9)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:55 AM

10. The article actually says that no charges have been filed . . . yet. The investigation is ongoing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SaltyBro (Reply #9)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:42 PM

52. If she was an accomplice to a felony, she wasnt innocent.

Seems to be two different storys. Will have to wait for truth to emerge. No, she didnt deserve to be shot, but the indication seems to be she and the boys were committing burglerys. Newsflash... committing crimes sometimes blows up in your face.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #52)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:34 PM

95. The only real fact we know is that she was hit in the back of her head.

For all we know, she and the boys were just chased by a bunch of drunk, gun-wielding, paranoids.

The point is we don't have the facts yet. It could go either way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #95)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:33 AM

182. Yes, no facts yet.

In fact, we dont know the guys were either drunk, or chasing the kids. Its possible she was just nearby and was hit by a wild shot. We do know she and the boys werent supposed to be there, and possibly were committing burglerys. Even if she didnt go in the cabins, just being there makes her an accomplice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #182)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:41 AM

183. She wouldn't be an accomplice unless they were planning to burglarize and she knew that. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #183)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:04 AM

192. She was close enogh to the action to get shot.

She certainly wasnt distancing herself from the crimes. Maybe she was a lookout?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #192)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:10 AM

195. I was once with a friend in a store and, all of a sudden,

I realized she was about to put something in her pocket (or did -- I can't remember). I was horrified, and I left the store.

But what if she'd been caught right then. Would I have been equally guilty because she was my friend and I was standing right next to her?

1) We don't know that anyone actually was burglarizing anything
2) If they were, we don't know whether it was pre-planned or impulsive
3) Unless it was preplanned and the girl was part of the conspiracy; or she was part of the actions, she isn't guilty.

And above all, she was shot in the back of the head. What gives anyone the right under any doctrine to shoot a non-threatening person in the back of the head?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:10 AM

14. Sounds like she was hanging with the wrong crowd.

stand near the fire and you'll eventually get burned...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #14)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:29 PM

46. Or maybe the teen crowd was outside fooling around

and a bunch of beer-drinking fishermen, having heard of previous break-ins, just got paranoid.

The point is we don't have the facts yet. Except for the FACT that the girl was shot in the back of the head. No one wanting to claim self-defense shoots someone in the back of the head.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #46)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:48 PM

64. You are just a laugh riot!

In the same post!

"The point is we don't have the facts yet."

and

"and a bunch of beer-drinking fishermen, having heard of previous break-ins, just got paranoid." And you know they were drinking how?

Well, should we wait for the facts ... or just go along with your random speculations? If you bend over and twist any more to come up with excuses for the innocent "kids" you'll turn into a pretzel.

You were right the first line - we don't have the facts yet but it might be a good time to stop with the excuses and speculation.

A couple of facts to consider. All fishermen do not drink/get drunk and not all gun owners and users are evil drunks looking for an excuse to shoot "innocent children that are just messing around" at 4AM.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #64)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:40 PM

88. your kinda fucking funny yourself..

As soon as we know if that actually happened we'll talk - or were you actually there?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117231712#post58

you've already presumed the girl guilty, yet want to chastise others for presuming the shooter guilty. or were you actually there? laugh. riot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #64)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:39 PM

98. I don't know they were drinking. I'm saying my possible scenario about the men is just as valid

as what other people have been speculating, about these kids being burglars. We don't know who is at fault because the facts aren't in yet.

(By the way, the attorneys involved have brought up the question of alcohol.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #98)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:43 PM

102. it is entirely possible that

the guys were drinking and the kids were burglars. Or, maybe neither is the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #46)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:12 PM

115. "The point is we don't have the facts yet."

 

Yet you very quickly and very often are willing to post this:

"Or maybe the teen crowd was outside fooling around

and a bunch of beer-drinking fishermen, having heard of previous break-ins, just got paranoid."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #115)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:17 PM

118. A bunch of people here instantly bought the idea that the teens were burglars.

All I'm saying was that there was another plausible theory that the teens weren't bad, and that the shooters were the guilty parties.

We don't know enough yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #118)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:09 AM

194. The sherriffs say they were committing armed burglaries.

Who knows, maybe the kids were drinking. Wouldnt be a shock.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #194)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:13 AM

196. Yeah, and sheriffs have never arrested people who turned out to be innocent?

Have I landed in freeperville? It's sure feeling that way.

Maybe the kids WERE drinking. But they didn't shoot anyone. I'd sure love to know the alcohol levels of the shooters, but something tells me that the sheriff didn't get the levels of the "gentlemen" involved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:55 AM

15. Someone will be charged

So far there seems to be three different versions of what happened:

They fired into the dark- negligent, manslaughter
They chased the kids and shot her while she was fleeing- manslaughter or murder
They fired at someone inside the shack and she was struck- quite possibly self-defense. Murder charges could be filed against the males

There is a lot more to this story than those short articles.

At the risk of being callous about a teen who has been tragically injured, I don't believe innocent is an apt term here. She lied to her family about her whereabouts, was running around at 4 a.m. with boys getting into trouble.... She is a smart person so I believe she was aware of what was going on, if not a participant. Maybe it was the thrill of being around 'bad kids'.

All in all a very sad situation. Hopefully she will pull through.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #15)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 10:26 AM

25. I'm with you on this one

Lots of ways it could go and the media is interested in eyeballs, not accuracy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #15)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:25 AM

199. The DA says there's not enough evidence to charge them. Sound familiar?

Baldwin County District Attorney Hallie Dixon says at this point, there's not enough evidence to charge the three men involved in the shooting of 17-year old Summer Moody.

On Sunday, the men stumbled upon a burglary in progress at a fishing camp on Gravine Island. The men fired two warning shots- one of the shots hit Moody in the back of the head.

Although Dixon says she won't charge the men involved in the shooting- she has charged three teens who were with Moody at the time of the break-in as adults.

SNIP

http://www2.wkrg.com/news/2012/apr/17/new-updates-gravine-island-investigation-ar-3626225/

____________

Interestingly, this account says that the men "stumbled upon a burglary in progress." In another report, a deputy was quoted as saying that the men heard noises, so they left their own camp, got in a boat, crossed a small river, got out of the boat and pursued the teens on foot, before shooting the girl.

But why bother investigating? Why even name the shooters? Who cares? It was just some 17 year old girl. She must have been guilty of something, or what was she doing there?

Sounds like she was guilty of being 17 . . . there's a lot of that going around lately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #199)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 11:47 AM

251. I note the DA says

"at this time" twice...

But why bother investigating?

I am up to about 5 or 6 versions of what happened now. It would be nice to get evidence to find which is correct

Why even name the shooters?

If charged it is public record. I am sure they will eventually be identifed

Who cares?

We do, else we would not be discussing it.

She must have been guilty of something

It sounds like she could be an accomplice to armed burglary. Or maybe not. Another reason to investigate.

what was she doing there?

Excellent question

Sounds like she was guilty of being 17 . . . there's a lot of that going around lately.

A lot of assumption of guilt based on sketchy news reports too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #199)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 12:09 PM

254. I'm guessing

the DA is waiting for the results from the ballistics test to see which gun the bullet came from and who fired it. It would be pretty embarrassing for the DA to charge one of the adults only to find out that the bullet did not come from any of their guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #254)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:29 PM

281. But why not name all three adults who were present as having been there?

Why the secrecy?

They named Summer Moody, who is a minor, before anyone else -- and she wasn't being charged with anything. As a minor, her identity was supposed to be protected, and her parents were very upset that it wasn't. Meanwhile, the names of the adults are being covered up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #281)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:36 PM

286. good question

I'm guessing the adults have not been charged with anything yet. Once they figure out who fired the shot that hit Ms. Moody, that person will be charged and named.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #286)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 02:27 PM

304. Reports today said that the prosecutor won't be charging the shooter. Maybe we'll never know. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:57 AM

16. Yup. Ain't nothin' more terrifyin' to a man than a 17 year old girl.

But I don't think of burglary as fun or a prank or anything but a felony.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aquart (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 09:38 AM

21. My brother and a bunch of his friends used

To hang out in an abandoned home when they were teenagers. I suppose technically it belonged to someone as it stood on a farm. Should they have been shot too? When I was a teenager we'd go exploring through homes at construction sites. Would it be ok to shoot us? From the article it doesn't sound like they thought anyone was around and were just trying to open one of the buildings. Besides, I think shooting someone as from behind is what cowards do. Why couldn't the shooter just call the police like a normal person? Those kids weren't threatening. Last year I caught a guy breaking into my car walking off with my kids stroller and a bunch of snacks. I yelled at him and chased him a bit and he dropped the stroller. With these stupid syg laws would have been ok if I shot him instead?
Personally I have less fear of thieves and criminals than of paranoid gun nuts who have to carry a loaded weapon to go to the grocery store and are amped up on fear sold to them 24/7 by hate radio and FOX news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to abelenkpe (Reply #21)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:30 PM

47. +1. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:41 AM

17. Big, brave men.

Shooting someone on the run in the back of the head -

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #17)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:50 AM

19. What would you have done?

 

Unknown persons breaking into your bedroom?

Stupid young men.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #19)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 10:05 AM

24. NOT what these gunslingin' idiots did.

Fire blindly into the dark?

Stupid gun toters.

It's a wonder they didn't shoot each other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #24)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 10:30 AM

26. Do you think the teens bear any responsibility in this?

 

What did the author of the article mean by partying? Stoned? Drunk? Were they impared? Were the fishermen drunk/hung over?

Is 17 the legal drinking age?

Is there a difference between this and playing chicken in a car?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #26)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:36 PM

49. Yes, I'd also like to know if the fisherman who did the shooting was alcohol-impaired.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #49)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:00 PM

55. As do I.

 

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #19)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:32 PM

48. Would you chase them on foot across the campground,

and then shoot one in the back of the head?

That's what the police are saying someone did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:49 AM

18. Another Second Amendment Solution - All Hail the Gun Heros!

Huzzah!



yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 09:44 AM

23. Fish camp? What kind of fishing were they doing with guns?

Well, I'm sure the gun culture calls this a "good shoot."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 10:43 AM

27. what happened to

just yelling "hey you kids, get outta here". So the outhouse shanty in the fishing camp was worth a human life? Bunch of candy assed chicken shit fisherman. I camp in the wilderness, bears are everywhere, and we wouldn't ever consider packing guns for "fishing".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riverwalker (Reply #27)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:16 PM

117. At 4am in a fishing camp, I'd be willing to bet there aren't too many lights around

 

to be able to identify WHO was kicking in your door.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riverwalker (Reply #27)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 03:20 AM

198. The kids were too far away to do that. So, instead, the fisherman

left their own camp, got in a boat, crossed a river, got out of the boat, and chased the teens on foot till they shot one in the back of the head.

And the majority of people here seem to think they were justified.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #198)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:28 PM

278. Where does it say this?

 

"got in a boat, crossed a river, got out of the boat, and chased the teens on foot till they shot one in the back of the head." I think this is the 3rd or 4th time you have said this. I thin this would certainly change the direction of the investigation.

The most recent stories I have seen said something along the lines of "heard a noise and went to investigate" - which seems to say they (fisherman) were already on the island. Seems like they got up from their camp and left to see what happened. Perhaps the noise of the door being broken at the other camp disturbed them.

What happened next seems to be where the gray area really begins.

But can we agree on this? If the scenario turns out to be (which I think is likely):

fisherman went to investigate - took someone's advice from this thread and said "Hey you kids get out of here" - and then fired a warning shot which they thought was going safely into some bushes. It looks like it is a tragic accident. Initiated by 4 teens mischief of private land. I am not absolving the fisherman of responsibility, but right now it looks like the onus is on the kids

Will we then hear the end of "why don't people fire a warning shot"? Because this is exactly why you don't.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinniSkipper (Reply #278)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:36 PM

287. Here's a picture of the "slough" they had to cross to get to where the teens were.

And they had to take a boat to leave. One way or another, they didn't just stumble on the teens. They pursued them across the water and then started shooting.

I also provided a different link at another post that you wrote.

http://blog.al.com/live/2012/04/shot_teen_summer_moody_still_a.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #287)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:40 PM

290. The fisherman were already there

 

It's the teens who crossed at night.

ETA - saw the deputies version in your link. And I had seen it exactly opposite in another story. Will try to find that. But yes - if that is indeed the case - that may present an issue for the fisherman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 10:46 AM

28. I'm rather sure...

...Alabama had the same SYG law in January of 2012. Said law did not preclude an arrest in this case: http://blog.al.com/montgomery/2012/01/16-year-old_opelikan_arrested.html

After reading both articles to which you linked it appears that you inferred that "no charges will be filed". In reality it says no charges HAVE been filed.


So inquiring minds want to know: Do have that ADD?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #28)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:17 AM

32. That article u linked to just says a 16 Y/O kid was charged for shooting someone.

no details.

But anyway, me saying no charges will be filed was just me expressing my opinion like nearly everything else I post is. I live in the area and know of several questionable SYG shootings where no charges were filed, We'll see what happens.

Also, below is a quote form this district attorney the paper contacted. He said in Alabama "citizens have a right to use deadly force against an aggressor to protect themselves or their property". It's a Pretty wide open law with a lot of wiggle room. I can not see any district attorney charging anyone over this. What they might do is just turn it over to the Grand Jury and let them decide.

The newspaper, however, contacted Conecuh County District Attorney Tommy Chapman, who referenced the Florida law that has become a focus of the controversial Trayvon Martin shooting in that state.
"Alabama’s law is not quite like Florida’s ‘stand your ground law’ but it is close," Chapman said.
He said that Alabama citizens have a right to use deadly force against an aggressor to protect themselves or their property, but such cases hinge on the actual circumstances. He said that Alabama’s law has potential for abuse.


http://blog.al.com/live/2012/04/shot_teen_summer_moody_still_a.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Reply #32)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:26 AM

33. My mistake...

...I took your subject to fact rather than opinion.

Many laws due to their wording or lack thereof have a potential for abuse. Court proceedings where failures in the laws are highlighted should lead to judicial review of the law(s) in question in cases where few or precedents exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:17 AM

31. More details in the case.

 

http://blog.al.com/live/2012/04/shot_teen_summer_moody_still_a.html

Here is the "camp". These are basically recreational cabins:



"According to the account of sheriff’s investigators, Moody and three teenage boys went early Sunday to the island.

"At some point in time," Sheriff Huey "Hoss" Mack said at a news conference, "it is believed the three of the juveniles — the three male juveniles at least — went into two fishing/hunting camps there adjacent to the island and we believe committed theft."

Two men staying at a camp on the back side of the island heard a door being broken. One of the men, according to Mack, was a caretaker of the property, knew of several recent break-ins and went to investigate.

The men discovered intruders and fired once each, Mack said.

Apparently, he said, Moody was hit by one of those shots. He said that a bullet from a small-caliber rifle struck her "toward the back of the head." "


The way I read this is 4 kids went to do some petty burglary, and Summer probably went along but was standing nearby when they were confronted by the property caretaker and his friend.

I'm sure more details will come to light as the investigation continues but at face value I see burglars who got shot at for burgling. I have no problem with the use of deadly force to protect property.

If the facts turn out to support my interpretation of events, then this ought to be a lesson to people about the perils of breaking into people's property.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #31)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:16 PM

40. So you think it is okay to chase burglars down and shoot them in the back of the head?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #40)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:39 PM

50. No.

 

So you think it is okay to chase burglars down and shoot them in the back of the head?

No.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #50)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:11 PM

56. That's what the police are saying happened. And if that is the case,

I hope the shooter learns a lesson about not chasing suspected burglars and shooting them in the back of the head.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #56)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:19 PM

57. I have not heard that.

 

The latest I have read is that the armed men fired a warning shot into some bushes, which struck the girl hiding there.

I have not read anything about chasing people down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #57)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:22 PM

82. Here's a link to an interview with an investigator who says they were chased.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #31)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 01:45 AM

178. And a lesson for yahoos with guns that killing someone when not much is at stake is

friggin wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 12:14 PM

35. Here's a Google Earth map of where this happened.

If you look at the white area on the map on the second image I pointed to, you can see that it's the only large white sand bar in the entire area. It's pretty common for people to go there on their boats to enjoy the sand and play around. I wouldn't be surprised if the kids just went to the sand bar to play around, saw the deserted looking buildings and decided to explore. There isn't any power to that area so there wouldn't be any TV's, computers, AC's or other electronics and it's common knowledge that no one would keep anything of value at them. The buildings are in a heavily trafficked area but there's no way to secure anything from thieves. Mostly my opinion.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Reply #35)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:18 PM

41. I think that's a reasonable possibility. It's possible the kids were just messing around

and the men, aware of previous break-ins, got paranoid. And what if alcohol was added to this situation? Of course, men out fishing never drink beer, do they?



Here's something from today:

http://www2.wkrg.com/news/2012/apr/17/summer-moody-update-ar-3623945/
Attorney Robert Stankowski says the family is frustrated about how Summer is being portrayed in this case, when there is no evidence at this point that she did anything wrong.

"We certainly have a lot of questions involved about whether or not the use of deadly force would have been appropriate under these circumstances. What these men were doing out there when they were firing these shots, whether or not alcohol was involved, whether or not these men put themselves in the zone of danger and created this situation," says attorney Robert Stankowski.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Reply #35)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:41 PM

51. "Exploring" at 4am.

 

I guess one person's burglary is another's exploring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:26 PM

44. An hour ago...

...this was published:

BAY MINETTE, Ala. — Authorities believe a former high school volleyball star was hit in the back of the head by a warning shot while three other teens allegedly burglarized an Alabama fish camp.

link: http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/eda81125979b4801a4745d7ea3aa826b/AL--Fish-Camp-Shooting/

I recall not long ago someone was extolling the virtues of the warning shot as popularized on tv and film.

http://binged.it/HNFpIx

This looks to me like an area where law enforcement maybe 30-40 minutes away. No roads, no bridges, only boat access to this area. This is not a place where you want to go surprising folks in the dark.

It's just sad all around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #44)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:43 PM

53. Shot while hiding.

 

"Mack says Moody was found shot in bushes where she was believed to be hiding."

It's sure sounding like these kids were up to no good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #53)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:56 PM

54. re: "...up to no good."

I really sympathize with her parents. No one wants to have this happen.

Your minor daughter is shot at 4 AM a 12 mile drive and a 1 mile boat ride away from where you thought she was. She's in critical condition and unconscious. I'm guessing the 3 young men she was with are known to the parents as they aren't charged with kidnapping.

I remember being 17. I wasn't long on wisdom. I don't know about "no good" but risky and stupid seem like accurate adjectives for this kind of behavior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #54)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:44 PM

62. I think it's worse than risky and stupid to chase a teen down and shoot her in the back of the head.

Which is what police say happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #62)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 04:12 PM

67. At this point...

...the reports are not conclusive. Of the two groups, the teens and the fishermen, the teens have been charged and the fishermen have not.


I have two daughters myself. My concern for their safety is constant. I don't want to imagine being in that situation. At this point nothing I've read leads me to believe for sure that the fishermen acted with the intention of harming another. They seem to have carelessly discharged firearms but the facts here are spotty.


BAY MINETTE, Ala. (AP) - Authorities believe a former high school volleyball star was hit in the back of the head by a warning shot while three other teens allegedly burglarized an Alabama fish camp.

Baldwin County Sheriff Huey "Hoss" Mack says 17-year-old Summer Moody was shot around 4 a.m. Sunday on Gravine Island in the Mobile Tensau Delta.

He says three men staying at the camp went to investigate what they thought was a break-in. 2 of those men fired warning shots.

Mack says Moody was found shot in bushes where she was believed to be hiding.

A University of South Alabama Medical Center spokeswoman says Moody remains in critical condition Tuesday morning.

The three men were questioned by authorities and released. The teens are being held on burglary charges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #67)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 04:52 PM

69. Yes, and George Zimmerman wasn't charged for how long?

The fact that the shooters haven't been charged yet doesn't mean they won't be. In any just world, there would be charges against anyone who shot an unarmed girl in the back of the head.

And, as I said, I sure hope the police did some blood alcohol testing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #69)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:00 PM

75. The Alabama game department

and I'm guessing that is who showed up, are probably more on the ball than Sanford PD. Besides, I doubt any of the guys' parents contributed to any of the DA's campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #69)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:01 PM

76. So what happens if they are innocent?

 

In any just world, there would be charges against anyone who shot an unarmed girl in the back of the head.

The problem comes when innocent people lawfully defend themselves or their property. If you charge them with a crime, they will have to spend many thousands of dollars defending themselves. This is the sort of thing Castle Doctrines and SYG laws were intended to prevent.

I don't have a problem with your proposal if the taxpayers foot the legal bills for people who are found to have lawfully defended themselves or their property.

I agree that every time there is a death there should be an investigation. But the cost of such investigations should not be a burden on the innocent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #76)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:07 PM

78. As I said...

...over 2 hours ago, sad all around.


I agree that every time there is a death there should be an investigation. But the cost of such investigations should not be a burden on the innocent.

I can agree with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #76)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:15 PM

79. People should not be able to execute others for the crime of taking their property.

You can't claim self-defense when you shoot someone in the back of the head.
And it isn't even clear that the shooter's own property was ever at stake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink