# Is this 'justice'? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 10, 2013, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877 "2013-10-10T15:35:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/21 "2013-10-10T17:02:35Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > The homeowner would face criminal charges of his own if he used force when it wasn’t justified by an immediate threat, so, say, capturing intruders and beating them or making them pleasure-slaves is right out. What immediate threat did the person crouching down and trying to drag his dying friend to safety in a closet present? ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/22 "2013-10-10T17:03:51Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > The rationale is that by agreeing to participate in the crime, you are complicit in the death - the same way that a get away driver is guilty of murder if the guys inside robbing the bank kill a person. The driver is not the one that pulled the trigger, but was a participant in the crime. Even though it was a perpetrator who was killed, his death was caused by the criminal action. Which is fine - when the crime is murder. As mentioned here - the homeowner didn’t commit a crime, so the death of the boys wasn’t murder. If it wasn’t a murder, how can they be held responsible for a murder. For it “just” being a burglary vs a dangerous home invasion - wouldn’t that have to be decided on the facts of the case? Something that the courts are supposed to be setup to handle? If it really was accepted to be the relativley lesser burglary vs something more sinister - then its overstepping the bounds just a tad… ---
**Author:** ![Stalky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b782af/32.png) [@Stalky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stalky)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/23 "2013-10-10T17:05:07Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > One of the supposed “murderers” was shot trying to drag his friend into a closet for safety, and another never even entered the building. Apparently, one of them didn’t even fight the charge and pleaded guilty…but the judge disregarded that action and gave him what for just like the others. I wonder if there are any limits to what a homeowner can do to an intruder if any consequences for the homeowner’s actions fall on said intruder and compatriots? Obviously there are. If, for example, he had raped one of these boys at gunpoint the conversation would be entirely different. There is, I believe, a commonly accepted consensus that persons should be able to use force in self defense, especially in their own homes, and especially when they are outnumbered. The situation is tragic, for a lot of different reasons, but when somebody dies in the commission of a felony it does seem fair, to me, to place the blame, and associated punishment, on those committing the crime and their accomplices. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/24 "2013-10-10T17:05:54Z")
The reason the felony murder rule exists is to prevent someone from arguing that while admittedly they planned to burglarize the home, they never intended for anyone to get hurt or killed. The law puts everyone on notice that when you burglarize, it’s very foreseeable that someone will get hurt or killed, even though that’s not your supposed intent: when you sneak into someone’s home intending to commit a felony therein, it’s obvious that a death is a substantially likely outcome, and that death is chargeable to you. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/25 "2013-10-10T17:07:15Z")
I think burglary is one of the most premeditated and dangerous of all crimes. None one breaks into someone else’s house by accident or under the heat of passion. Everyone knows it’s wrong, and everyone knows that homeowners are sometimes armed. This is one crime where harsh sentences might actually work as a deterrent. I think the penalties should be much higher, including for “first offenders.” In addition, many people are convicted of felony murder who have not killed anyone, even in cases where it was one of their co-criminals who got killed. Given all of that, my sense of justice would be served if they got somewhere in the range of 10 to 20 years in this case. (I would have given them five years if there was no shooting at all.) ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/26 "2013-10-10T17:07:45Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > The rationale is that by agreeing to participate in the crime, you are complicit in the death - the same way that a get away driver is guilty of murder if the guys inside robbing the bank kill a person. The driver is not the one that pulled the trigger, but was a participant in the crime. Even though it was a perpetrator who was killed, his death was caused by the criminal action. Maybe it’s my libertarian core of personal responsibility talking, but that strikes me as unjust as well (though less so, since the person killed wasn’t one of the felons). A person should be responsible for their own actions, not those of others. > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > IMO justice is never served by applying the felony-murder rule in **any** case. But this is exactly the kind of case it is meant for. Can you not see value in punishing a homicide that a person caused unknowingly or unintentionally more severely if it was in furtherance of a dangerous felony? Like my example: an intruder accidentally kills a homeowner, instead of manslaughter it becomes murder. I’d say that serves justice, you? ---
**Author:** ![Stalky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b782af/32.png) [@Stalky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stalky)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/27 "2013-10-10T17:09:22Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > What immediate threat did the person crouching down and trying to drag his dying friend to safety in a closet present? Clearly the judge saw fit, after hearing what evidence was available to him, to conclude that the home owner did not act unreasonably. If you have further evidence you should present it. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/28 "2013-10-10T17:10:24Z")
> [@Stalky](#): > > The situation is tragic, for a lot of different reasons, but when somebody dies in the commission of a felony it does seem fair, to me, to place the blame, and associated punishment, on those committing the crime and their accomplices. I have no problem with serving time for crimes committed, but I do have problems with what this law does. Convict them for burglary and, _if it can be proved_, intent to harm, but if that killing was justifiable homicide then it should not also be ruled murder. There is punishment enough for what they actually did, in my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/29 "2013-10-10T17:12:00Z")
> [@Stalky](#): > > Clearly the judge saw fit, after hearing what evidence was available to him, to conclude that the home owner did not act unreasonably. If you have further evidence you should present it. Is there a link to any evidence or testimony pertaining to that part of the case? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/30 "2013-10-10T17:15:17Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > What immediate threat did the person crouching down and trying to drag his dying friend to safety in a closet present? This made me go check, and as it happens Indiana has the Castle Doctrine. [Relevant portion:](http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar41/ch3.html#IC35-41-3-2) > [@](#): > > (d) A person: > (1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against any other person; and > (2) does not have a duty to retreat; > if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle. So, based on that, I was mistaken: if there’s an unlawful entry of the person’s dwelling in progress, there does not have to be an immediate threat, apparently, the use of force just must be reasonable (so, pleasure-slavery is probably still out). > [@Bricker](#): > > The reason the felony murder rule exists is to prevent someone from arguing that while admittedly they planned to burglarize the home, they never intended for anyone to get hurt or killed. > > The law puts everyone on notice that when you burglarize, it’s very foreseeable that someone will get hurt or killed, even though that’s not your supposed intent: when you sneak into someone’s home intending to commit a felony therein, it’s obvious that a death is a substantially likely outcome, and that death is chargeable to you. Would you mind explaining, if you know, the basis of the argument that: > [@](#): > > The statutory language “kills another human being while committing” does not restrict the felony murder provision only to instances in which the felon is the killer, but may also apply equally when, in committing any of the designated felonies, the felon contributes to the death of any person. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/31 "2013-10-10T17:25:00Z")
Stripping away (even from my OP) to reveal the essence of the case: A group of teens received 50 years in prison for burglary. Inappropriate. Unfair. Not justice. ---
**Author:** ![Stalky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b782af/32.png) [@Stalky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stalky)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/32 "2013-10-10T17:25:32Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I have no problem with serving time for crimes committed, but I do have problems with what this law does. Convict them for burglary and, _if it can be proved_, intent to harm, but if that killing was justifiable homicide then it should not also be ruled murder. There is punishment enough for what they actually did, in my opinion. When you put your accomplices in harms way by committing a felony with them it logically follows that you should then assume some of the responsibility for what happens to your accomplices during the course of events. As I said previously, it’s possible that this punishment is too harsh, but it seems clear that they were responsible for his death. The whole system should be re-worked to focus on rehabilitation, instead of punishment, in my opinion, but that is a topic for another thread. In the context of this situation, and the current legal paradigm, and in my own humble personal opinion, the rendered judgement is close enough to justice. Maybe less years would be closer, but that wouldn’t follow from the relevant statute. It doesn’t serve society as well as it could, but that’s more of a problem of the concept of retributive justice, as apposed to an issue of fairness. ---
**Author:** ![Stalky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b782af/32.png) [@Stalky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stalky)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/33 "2013-10-10T17:28:15Z")
> [@KarlGauss](#): > > Stripping away (even from my OP) to reveal the essence of the case: > > A group of teens received 50 years in prison for burglary. > > Inappropriate. Unfair. Not justice. You forgot to add “Somebody dies” Now it’s justice. Or at least justice-er. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/34 "2013-10-10T17:44:19Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > So, based on that, I was mistaken: if there’s an unlawful entry of the person’s dwelling in progress, there does not have to be an immediate threat, apparently, the use of force just must be reasonable (so, pleasure-slavery is probably still out). In CA - if someone breaks into your home, there is a presumption of a threat. So to justify using deadly force outside your home, you have to demonstrate the threat, in your home the mere fact that they broke in is justification enough. > [@bengangmo](#): > > Which is fine - when the crime is murder. > > As mentioned here - the homeowner didn’t commit a crime, so the death of the boys wasn’t murder. If it wasn’t a murder, how can they be held responsible for a murder. The homeowner didn’t commit a crime, but the group of four did. It was felony murder, committed by the group of four. Each participated in the action that resulted in the death of one of the robbers. Your statement that it wasn’t murder is false. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/35 "2013-10-10T17:45:20Z")
> [@Stalky](#): > > You forgot to add “Somebody dies” > > Now it’s justice. Or at least justice-er. You forgot to add “ruled a justifiable homicide”. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/36 "2013-10-10T17:59:38Z")
> [@Stalky](#): > > You forgot to add “Somebody dies” > > Now it’s justice. Or at least justice-er. Okay, let me rephrase it: You’re 16-years-old, screwing off with your friends. “Hey, man. See that house? There’s no one home. Let’s take a peek”. You enter the house with your whole life ahead of you. You have no clue that you’re not gonna leave until you’re 71. When I think of the stuff I did when I was 16, 17 . . . I didn’t “break” into places, but I sure as hell trespassed. I used, and sold, drugs. I was stupid. “All” 16-year-olds are. So, even had a “one size fits all” law such as this one been in effect back then, I doubt I would have done differently. And, today, I’d be counting down my remaining time . . . only 13 years left! There but for the grace of god. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/37 "2013-10-10T18:01:22Z")
By the way, if you want to go the “they got what they deserved” route, let’s not forget to factor in the killing of one and the injuring of the other _while he was attempting to save the life of his friend instead of either attacking the homeowner or running away_. Was that act of what could only be labeled bravery factored into his sentence, or do you feel the proper thing to do at that time was to dump his friend and run away? Surrendering certainly wasn’t an option at that time-the homeowner apparently had a license to kill. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/38 "2013-10-10T18:10:35Z")
I applaud these type of laws, the legislators that pass them, and the prosecutors that have the courage to apply them. I also applaud the home owner for being ready to defend his family and his home. Bravo and hearty back slaps all around! ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/39 "2013-10-10T18:14:00Z")
Once the perpetrators realized that the home was occupied were they given a chance to run off or surrender, or did the homeowner just start shooting? If there was no warning, what should they have done when discovered? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877/40 "2013-10-10T18:14:47Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I applaud these type of laws, the legislators that pass them, and the prosecutors that have the courage to apply them. I also applaud the home owner for being ready to defend his family and his home. Bravo and hearty back slaps all around! I don’t fault him for shooting home invaders, but I’m not sure if I’d slap him on the back for shooting the one that was helping a fallen comrade (if that’s what actually happened). But in the heat of confrontation, I might not blame him either. Tragic, and completely the fault of the invaders… but shooting a kid while he’s helping his wounded friend is not laudable, in my opinion. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-justice/670877.md?page=3)