Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Missouri shooting case tests Castle Doctrine

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:00 AM
Original message
Missouri shooting case tests Castle Doctrine
Sounds like the shooter reacted too quickly to me but of course I was not there. Interesting case though.


She kept thinking that if only she hadn't gone to her neighbor's house to try to settle a dispute, the father of her two children would still be alive.

"I put myself through a really bad guilt trip," she said. "I relive that night: 'Well, if I hadn't gone down there, things would be so different; he would still be here.'"

But on that night --about 8 p.m. Jan. 17 --Hicks was shot and killed, allegedly by a neighbor whom he and Lawson called a friend.

When police arrived, they found Hicks lying on the front steps of that neighbor's house with a fatal gunshot wound to the upper chest.

<snip>

http://www.news-leader.com/article/20110424/NEWS01/1042...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
no_hypocrisy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
1. I wonder how well will The Castle Doctrine hold up when the situation allowed for
police assistance before things spiraled out of control?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
2. This should be an interesting thing to follow.
It's right on the edge, it seems to me.

My rule is that they don't come into the house. I will not shoot someone outside of the house unless they are firing at the house.

If they come into the house, they will have had to use force to enter. They will not survive that entry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. It must be nice to make up your own laws. Try taking that one to court.
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 09:14 AM by geckosfeet
Castle Doctrine

A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal doctrine arising from English Common Law<1> that designates one's place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his "castle"), and any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.


Of course, your mileage may vary with driving habits, terrain and weather conditions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
19. Actually, what I described is following the law where I live
exactly. If someone makes forcible entry, I am justified in fearing for my life and the lives of other residents. The forcible entry is sufficient evidence of a violent intent.

If they remain outside, and do not make entry, I would be on very shaky ground if I shot them.

It is that simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #19
23. Yes - forcible entry I think, would have me aiming as well
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
3. Castle Doctrine = legalized murder, and we will see more of this with more GOP/NRA Castle laws - yup
"But yer honor I felt threatened"

bang bang yer dead

no charges

yup

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Again, the proper phrase is 'yup yup yup'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. yup yup yup
better?

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. tanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #3
12. So are all justified shootings "Legal Murder" based on your logic? n-t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #12
31. and this was justified how?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #31
35. oh, I see what you are doing...
you do not want to broaden the discussion. You are attempting to stifle discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #35
60. and how do you arrive at that bogus conclusion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #31
52. No one here claims that it was.
So far we view it as suspicious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #52
61. I seem to see several posts that conclude that this shooting was justified
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. Only from the antis like you who want to use it as an excuse to ban guns.
Castle Doctrine laws only cover shootings INSIDE the residence. It is fairly difficult to make the self-defense argument for shooting someone who is outside presenting no threat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #3
13. justifiable homicide and we will only see it if More people illegally enter
people's homes, especially after midnight.

and I betcha "yerhonor" has a gun at home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #13
32. what was justified about it? What do he do that was "illegal"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #32
34. are you saying that there is not such a thing as justifiable homicide?
are you saying that nothing is illegal?

IF a person illegally enters (espcially after midnight)

that is all I was saying.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #34
59. I never said that at all - you seem to be saying this case was justified
just would like to understand how you came to that conclusion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #13
36. It's all about shooting someone and getting away with it
doesn't matter if it's the diabetic having an insulin reaction or an Alzheimer patient confused over where they live or yer daughter's boyfriend on alate night visit

as long as they are dead dead dead we are safe in our Castle

yup
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #36
40. no, it is not about that and you know it.
I don't have a daughter. Where I live, I doubt that a confused Alzheimer patient could stumble and the diabetic with the insulin reaction does not live with or near me.

Protecting myself and dead, dead, dead are 2 very different things.

You can not legislate away every possiblity.

Have you no common sense?

You have an agenda and that is fine.

Guess what in America both sides get to discuss the issues, both sides of it.

We have judges and juries to decide on the individual cases.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #36
54. If they kick the door in, then none of that matters.
Why would a diabetic kick my door down? Why would an Alzheirmer patient kick my door in? Why would a daughter's boyfriend kick the door in? You seem to forget about the violent entry part of the equation. If someone kicks my door in then I don't have the time to ask them why. But if it is just some guy knocking on the door then I can call the police as long as he is outside.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
4. Does not sound justified to me, but I was not there either.
The incident report stated that no weapon was found on or around the body of Hicks after he was shot.

Amanda Hicks said she didn't believe her father was presenting an imminent danger to the neighbor or his wife.

"I've read up on (the Castle Doctrine). I've read the whole thing. I've analyzed it," she said. "And what I get from it is that you can protect yourself (with deadly force) if it's either your life or their life."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. When the Texas moran shot two alleged burglars in his *neighbor's* yard...
That didn't seemed justified either

but the moran walked

legalized murder

yup

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. The guy was an idiot in Texas and should have went to jail. But of course you ignore....
the cases where it helps people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. Helps people to do what - kill people?
It's a vigilante miscarriage of justice

yup
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. LOL....so no shooting is ever justified to you? Figures. n-t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. Seems like it. Amazing that in 2011, we are still hashing this out in the courts.
And it appears that sanity is losing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #8
20. "That didn't seemed justified either"
A Texas grand jury decided otherwise..and to you, nothing seems justified. Apparently you expect us all to just cower in fear when confronted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #20
24. Sorry to hear about your 'cowering in fear' problems, but the willy nilly shooting
of people who scare you is not proper use of the castle doctrine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. The Texas grand jury let the Texas Castle Moran walk
Clue: he shot 2 men that were *not on his property* because he *thought* they were breaking into *someone else's house*

The 911 operator tried to stop him

but the moran invoked the Castle Doctrine and shot them anyway.

Legalized murder

yup
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #8
21. And that was under a different set of laws, unique to Texas....
as you have been told before.

-1 for dishonesty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #8
55. They were on his yard when he fired.
The responding deputy arrived as Horn fired and the deputy said that the burglars had started to come at Horn. And they weren't "alleged" burglars, they were burglars. Further, Texas law is different from Missouri law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
S_B_Jackson Donating Member (564 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #4
22. I think much is going to turn upon daddy's little girl's conduct......
and whether or not the daughter, Amanda Hicks, actually made the type of calls that are being alleged.
However, the biggest question would be whether the suspect reasonably believed he needed to use deadly force, he said.

According to the police incident report, the suspect's wife "made several spontaneous statements that Rex's daughter, Amanda Hicks, had called her several times and told her that Rex was going to come over and kill them."


If she did make those calls, then the daughter may have to come to terms with the fact that her behavior likely cost her father his life........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
15. This Is Murder, Sir, Cut And Dried: Hesitation By the Prosecutor Is Idiocy Or Incompetence
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Yes, because you were there and know exactly what was going on. Glad you are not.....
on a real jury.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. There Is Sufficient Information in The Accounts Provided, Sir
The man who shot was beating a woman, her boy-friend approached, and the man beating the woman shot him dead.

Had Mr. Hicks approached with a pistol and shot the man beating Ms.Lawsaon, he would have been acting properly and legally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #18
26. Yes, because a local newspaper coverage is what we should base...
guilt on. Wow, that would save a lot of time and money in a trial. Great idea!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. Good Luck With That Line, Sweetie....
"The meaning of an utterance is that taken from it by the auditor."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. Not sure what that means. Not as smart as you I guess. n-t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Katya Mullethov Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. You tweeked the "Sir " right out of 'em
Good shot .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #29
33. Courteous Respect, Ma'am, is The Proper Opening Position
But it is quite possible for a person to demonstrate it is folly to continue on that line in the individual case....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #27
45. !
lord, the pomp. and the quotes with no credit given. you are a true gem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #15
41. !
wow. the condescension is palpable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. People Who Think They Are Being Condescended To, Ma'am, Usually Know Best Their Own Level....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. people who capitalize every word in their post
are of a level all their own.

good day, sir.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #44
48. Having Quite A Good Day, Ma'am
Just put the leg of lamb in the oven, cooking it with mint and apple juice: it should be out around four-thirty. The older grand-children will be going off to spend easter money, and the youngest is down for her nap, so we will have the house to ourselves for a bit, which is always pleasant.

The small increment of amusement you are adding is welcome, though hardly necessary....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #48
51. same for you
you have given me quite the grin. Sanctimonious, judgmental people tend to do that. Happy Easter!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
30. sad - but will certainly not be the last of incidents like this
no wonder we are the laughing-stock around the world with our rambo-like approach to gun laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
37. She went over to cause a fight about some alleged debt and got exactly what she was looking for
Now she will have to deal with the guilt of knowing that her actions caused the death of someone she cared about.

Hicks had no business being there in the first place. He was jumping in on the side of the aggressor against two people fighting in self defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1monster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #37
38. What an incredibly sexist piece of garbage that line is. No woman looks for
(as in wants) a man to beat her!

I'm so thouroghly disgusted by your post that I don't dare to comment further so as to avoid breaking TOS. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. If they attack his wife than that is exactly what they are doing
Men have as much right to defend themselves and their loved ones as Women do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
one-eyed fat man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. Clear something up for me then
If a woman physically assaults a man, what are his options? Maybe I am just too Neanderthal but it would seem to me if some woman comes up to someone and starts slapping and hitting them, they are asking for a fight. Are you saying they should just suffer the abuse until she gets "it" out of her system?

"If you're looking for trouble, I'll accommodate you. Otherwise, leave it alone."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1monster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #42
46. Please enlighten me on where the partner of the man who was killed
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 01:00 PM by 1monster
physically attacked the killer or his wife. I've read the article twice now, and perhaps may have misinterperted something, but I read the woman confronted her neighbors about money owed to her and that she was beaten by the killer and his wife. Not that the woman had physically attacked them.

Please point out where I misunderstood what I read or another link that states she attacked them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
one-eyed fat man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. Nowhere in this case does it say.
You made the blanket statement:

"What an incredibly sexist piece of garbage that line is. No woman looks for(as in wants) a man to beat her!"

I suppose in all cases then you are still correct, even if she is the assailant she doesn't want the man to beat her.

I don't know what happened. It may have started as a cat fight and then husbands and boyfriends got involved. The husband and wife may have been beating up the other woman, I sure don't have a clue. But if she went over there spoiling for a fight, she has no bitch coming if she got one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. The Statement 'I Sure Don't have a Clue', Sir, Ought To Be Followed by Silence
As that is an announcement a person has nothing useful to say on the matter at hand....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #49
57. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
one-eyed fat man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #49
63. well, I see.
May as well have added peevish, petulant and hypersensitive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #46
50. Why don't you show me where they were allowed to speak in their own defense
This article is nothing but an ideologically driven hit piece of junk journalism featuring nothing but the uncontested ramblings of the person who caused the incident.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
53. Another trigger happy gun owner shooting an unarmed man. Glad this wasn't at a public place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #53
58. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
56. Getting involved in domestic disputes is the number one cop killer.
NEVER, ever, personally go the home of a fighting couple while the fight is going on. If need be call the cops and let them handle it. On the face of it this doesn't sound like self-defense, but there could be other factors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 06:44 AM
Response to Reply #56
64. Probably the most pragmatic reply on the thread... a no brainer if you are in
a metro/urban area with a well staffed and accessible police department - as (I suspect) most of us are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jul 22nd 2014, 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC