The Castle law is worthless

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Steven B. Adams

Moderator
Two brothers, who's father is Assist. Cheif of Police Paoli,In...violated overlapping restraining orders..one of the two is a convicted felon and part of the terms of his probation was to have "no contact" with the victim. On 11/24/2010 the two went to his home and shot him claiming self-defense because the victim bradished a shot in the door way of his home knowing that the two men their were there to do him harm. No charges were filed until after I contacted WAVE TV 3 news and they ran a story. Then 3 weeks investigation follows and one of the suspects has been arrested just for the violations of restraining orders and probation. No other charges filed. No fingers prints taken, no powder residue, no toxicology on the two assailants, no breathylizer...nothing but two interviews from the two men who both agreed it was self defense. What about Indiana's version of the Castle Law? The bullet hole in the storm door shows he was ambushed from the side by the shooter, yet they claim self defense knowingly breaking restraining orders.
 
And Castle law is worthless why? Just going on what you've posted, it sounds like a problem involving people who failed to do their jobs in upholding the law, not the fault of the law itself.
Not to seem confrontational, but it seems as though you have an axe to grind here.
 
First, my condolences to the OP if the victim was someone close to you.

By the way, for the benefit of others, here is a link to a story about the incident.

But I agree with overkill, there seems to be some confusion here as to how the Castle Doctrine applies. The Castle Doctrine comes into play only after the use of deadly force at issue is determined to be justified. If it is justified, then the Castle law typically provides that the person who justifiably used deadly force cannot be criminally liable (and in some states, there is also immunity from civil prosecution).

OP, are you complaining that the DA's office wrongly determined that the shooting was justifiable use of deadly force? That may be true, but that has no implications in terms of the worth of the Castle law. In other words, if your disagreement is with the result here, you shouldn't complain about the law, you should complain about the police investigation and the DA's decision not to prosecute.

DD
 
"the two went to his home and shot him claiming self-defense because the victim bradished a shot in the door way of his home knowing that the two men their were there to do him harm."

One newspaper article I just read said the two of them went there to find one guy's son. Where's the proof they went there to do him harm? Why was the son supposed to be there? Was the trailer a doublewide? :)

As far as the shotgun goes, the world is full of shotguns, maybe he borrowed one. I doubt we'll ever know what happened.
 
If either of the two who went to the man's had a no tresspass or other NO CONTACT notice against them, they knew about it...

I knowi n my state, I am not brandishing if I answer my door armed... Heck, I can cycle the action in the face of religious recruiters and not face charges...

I foresee a deep investigation regarding the relationship of officials to the shooters!

Brent
 
In any case, as usual we have incomplete and conflicting information. There's no way to draw meaningful conclusions with so little to go on. That's why we have courts.
 
Interesting story but I'm not sure how the Castle Doctrine is really even a part of the story. Additionally, I'm sure there is more to this than meets the eye and the local PD have more information than has made the news.
 
The Castle Law

Yes..I have an axe to grind...the victim was my son in law....The custody of the child was mediated by the gaurdians(grandparents on both sides) the father had restraining orders and protective orders against him with with respect to the wife, her husband(my son in law) and the child. He was not suppose to go to that home or pick up the child with out mediation. My son in law was ambushed in his doorway and the Castle Law was used by the prosecutor to set the two free. There has been numerous altercations between them.... hence the restraining orders and my son in law, knew the two of them were not there that night to exchange Christmas presents. Only one shot fired...the shot that killed him ...from the side...the secound he appreared through the doorway....if in fact he did brandish the shotgun ..it was found out in the driveway..
 
The Castle Law

The prosecutor used the law to say that the two men felt threatened at the sight of a man with a shotgun in his doorway...so their use of deadly force was warranted. again....they were not supposed to be there....there are reasons they had restraining orders against them to prohibit them from dropping over for a visit.
 
Here is a reasonably detailed article in which the County Prosecutor lays out facts and describes who was charged (or not), for what, and why.

The OP stated that some of the participants were related to members of local law enforcement. Someone may have been sensitive to that issue since the state police and other state agencies were involved in the investigation.
 
about the law

I don't know what state you are in, but in Alabama, and most other states with Castle laws, the law specifically states for the law to be applicable, that the shooter has to be able to legally be where he was, and to not have instigated the incident. That, from what has been said here, is not the case, either way.

This is not a problem with the law, but a seemingly blatant misuse of the law, for whatever reason.

AFM :(
 
The prosecutor used the law to say that the two men felt threatened at the sight of a man with a shotgun in his doorway...so their use of deadly force was warranted.
Click to expand...

I understand your anger in view of the circumstances, but again, the problem here is not with the law, but with the prosecutor's determination that the two men were (allegedly) acting in self-defense. Surely you aren't saying that the law should not permit the legal defense of "self-defense" in any situation, are you?

DD
 
There is no way from a distance for us to determine the validity of claims. The OP statement that the Castle law is worthless is an overstatement as the incident needs to be analyzed on its technical aspects.

Thus, closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top