I hate to throw cold water on the thread, but I’ve been involved with (something very close to) a burial at sea. It was quite moving; not something I would joke about.
I’ve probably made jokes here that others thought were lacking in taste, so to each their own.
I’m not dead yet!
Ohhhhh, sorry, and sorry that you lost someone close.
I had to watch my dad’s burial at see on video tape.
That’s okay, don’t worry about it. It was a strange set of circumstances; not someone I was terribly close to, but I’ll never forget.
A sad situation:
That is indeed a sad situation. Having lots of guns ensures lots of people will use them inappropriately.
But I wonder why the shooter was charged with 3 counts of murder when only one person was shot at and only one person was murdered.
From the article.
“When she tried to get away, he shot her once, then there was more exchange between them," Shultz said. “Mr. Brock was at some point injured to his head, and he shot Ms. Hall a second time. There was more conversation, and then he shot her a third time. Only after he shot her a third time did he then make contact with authorities to report the incident.”
It appears it’s been decided he made 3 separate attempts. Maybe it should be two charges of attempted murder, one charge of murder.
Oh, I totally got that he shot her three times. I just don’t see three shots being three counts of murder.
The apparent fact the shots were well-spaced in time, not a rapid fire triple-tap, suggests he made three distinct decisions to harm the victim. (It also suggests crappy shooting or a weak gun, but that’s a separate thread).
I can imagine how the technicalities of Ohio code law lead to that being three murder charges for one death. After all, which shot was the fatal one? Sometimes that’s clear, sometimes it isn’t.
But I still don’t like the smell of the charging decision.
I’ve heard of a legal hypothetical about a person who jumps off a building. As they’re plummeting to a certain death, someone shoots them. An autopsy concludes that the shot was instantly fatal, and the person was dead before they hit the ground. It doesn’t matter that the bullet only shortened the victim’s life by a few seconds, it’s still murder.
Maybe that’s what’s at play here. Shoot someone in the gut and cause a wound that will be fatal, but will take an hour to bleed out. 30 minutes later, shoot them in the head. You’ve caused two fatal wounds, each of which shortened the victim’s life compared to what it otherwise would have been. Is that two counts of murder?
Not sad - outrageous.
It never occurred to the old man to contact the authorities? He’s worried there’s a criminal in his driveway and he makes no attempt to call 911?
Someone calls you claiming to be part of law enforcement then demands you leave money in a box on your porch and you don’t call anyone to confirm this is on the level? That is not how the legal system works. What an ignorant tool.
Aside from that - on the video she is clearly retreating from him, lethal force is not justified.
He shot her three times? And not just blam-blam-blam out of fear of panic, but bang! … wait a bit… bang!.. wait a bit… bang! That’s not self-defense, that’s execution.
I’m sorry - you are not allowed to confiscate peoples’ stuff (cellphone), prevent them from leaving your property, or methodically shoot someone who is unarmed and posing no physical threat to you. No, not even in castle-law states. That’s not justifiable as self-defense.
Hence the felonious assault, the charge of kidnapping (for preventing her from leaving) and the three murder charges.
Seriously - he’s on tape telling her to “Get out!” then he doesn’t let her get in the car to, you know, get out.
The old guy is a danger. Put him in jail for the rest of his life to protect the rest of us.
Supposedly, his first shot was to her leg - if that was deliberate then it might not be “crappy shooting” but shooting with intent to maim rather than kill.
And I don’t care how “weak” a gun is, it’s still lethal force and it can still kill you. Heck, people have been killed with starter pistols and BB guns.
She died at the hospital, the medical records may be relevant in regards to that but of course I do not have access to them.
He was 81 years old; so there is a possibility of mental decline… It sounds like he was also frightened.
Perhaps people who frighten easily and have mental decline should not be permitted to have firearms.
What a country! NOT!
I expect that so was his victim.
The hypothetical should be that the person was pushed off the roof. Two attempted murders, but only one successfully taken to the final.
Throw in the fact that the victim was poisoned with a slow acting but fatal poison that morning, and terrorists destroyed the building seconds later, and the law class can go wild.
But the terrorists’ explosion was beaten to the punch by mere milliseconds when a large meteor landed on the building obliterating much of the surrounding city.
That’s going to make it hard to do the autopsy to determine which of those things killed the victim.
They’d need a forensic team, a ballistics expert, and a meteorologist…
I’ve been frightened many times in my life, in some cases even while holding a weapon. I have managed not to kill anyone. Much less anyone retreating from me.
Not an excuse at all.
And if he’s mentally declining he effin’ shouldn’t have a gun!
But she was a black woman near his home!! What else could he do?!
/s