19 Year Old Girl Shot Looking for Help

[MomentsofSanity]

Autopsy apparently shows she was shot in the face and not at close range either.

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/...lose-range?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

 

[dbk]

Ruled as a homicide

Ruled as a homicide but the shooter has yet to be charged? What does that mean? So the 54-yr old man didn't shoot her and someone else did?

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Ruled as a homicide

Ruled as a homicide but the shooter has yet to be charged? What does that mean? So the 54-yr old man didn't shoot her and someone else did?

Just means her death was the result of another's actions. An autopsy doesn't assess guilt. Just method of death. Everyone knew it was homicide from the start. The question is was it justifiable.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Based on the photo of the house shehateme posted the porch is too small for the home owner to have opened the door and shot the woman without it leaving residue/be considered a close range shot. This would be more in inline with a shot from across a room as the person was at the door. Once shot fell backwards onto the porch.

 

[LTC8K6]

Ruled as a homicide

Ruled as a homicide but the shooter has yet to be charged? What does that mean? So the 54-yr old man didn't shoot her and someone else did?

Homicide doesn't mean murder. It means one person killed another person. This can be murder, self defense, accident, etc.

 

[Dari]

Is it murder if she was shot at a distance?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Is it murder if she was shot at a distance?

Not if she had entered or was in the process of entering the house where she was not in invited. Michigan's Castle Doctrine allows a homeowner to use deadly force to stop a person from breaking into their home.

 

[Dari]

Not if she had entered or was in the process of entering the house where she was not in invited. Michigan's Castle Doctrine allows a homeowner to use deadly force to stop a person from breaking into their home.

Any specifics on where she was shot? The porch? At the door? Blowing someone away just because they're coming towards your home is absolutely disgusting. A woman, too. Fuck, people don't know how to fucking communicate anymore? Talk, it's what separates us from other animals.

 

[nehalem256]

Autopsy apparently shows she was shot in the face and not at close range either.

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/...lose-range?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

Reed said the medical examiner’s description of a close-range wound is usually defined by whether the weapon was held against the victim’s skin, meaning the finding in McBride’s autopsy may not play a large role in determining if the homeowner is charged.

So it sounds like she could have been 3 feet away and it wouldn't have been considered close range.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I would say there's enough evidence that makes it plausible that the homeowner could believe she was trying to enter or had entered the house when she was shot or the homeowner would have already been charged. The fact this occurred at 3:40am adds to the plausability that the person was attempting to break in as well.

 

[waggy]

I would say there's enough evidence that makes it plausible that the homeowner could believe she was trying to enter or had entered the house when she was shot or the homeowner would have already been charged. The fact this occurred at 3:40am adds to the plausability that the person was attempting to break in as well.

again the odds that a person who just got in a wreck is going to then break in is low to zilch.

I do believe she was messed up and confused. and tried to enter the house though. The owner then thinking someone was trying to break shot..

sad situation.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

I would say there's enough evidence that makes it plausible that the homeowner could believe she was trying to enter or had entered the house when she was shot or the homeowner would have already been charged. The fact this occurred at 3:40am adds to the plausability that the person was attempting to break in as well.

Honest question. Other than assumptions on her actions what evidence is there to draw such a conclusion? There has been no statements of her actions, no statements of her gaining or attempting to gain entry. There is really nothing at all.

As it stands I don't see enough evidence to draw any conclusions at all on what happened without a lot of assumption.

 

[bshole]

The thing is, the shooter's life doesn't have to be in danger, he just has to believe it is in danger for the killing to be righteous. That is the law in Michigan. All he has to do is say hey I was scared for my life and the case is closed. Really really weird law.... basically a license to kill.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Honest question. Other than assumptions on her actions what evidence is there to draw such a conclusion? There has been no statements of her actions, no statements of her gaining or attempting to gain entry. There is really nothing at all.

As it stands I don't see enough evidence to draw any conclusions at all on what happened without a lot of assumption.

Based on the homeowners lawyer's statement, there some type of evidence that shows he was justified. Shot from the gun in the interior wall/s near the door? Victims foot still within the house/door jam area?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/08/renisha-mcbride-shooting_n_4242199.html

“I’m confident when the evidence comes, it will show that my client was justified and acted as a reasonable person would who was in fear for his life."

 

[EagleKeeper]

Ok, so you think a girl who had been wandering the neighborhood...confused....somehow made her way into this man's home...

You think a 54 year old man, armed and living alone would leave his shit unlocked.....


I have a beach house I can sell you in Idaho.

The Snake River has some nice beaches for fishing from; Please provide the location

 

[HomerJS]

The thing is, the shooter's life doesn't have to be in danger, he just has to believe it is in danger for the killing to be righteous. That is the law in Michigan. All he has to do is say hey I was scared for my life and the case is closed. Really really weird law.... basically a license to kill.

Resonable person question...

If you fear someone at your front door was going to harm you

A. Open door
B. Don't open door call police

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Resonable person question...

If you fear someone at your front door was going to harm you

A. Open door
B. Don't open door call police

What do you do if C occurs?

C. Person/s open/comes through door

Ask them if they would like tea and crumpets?

 

[BlitzPuppet]

Resonable person question...

If you fear someone at your front door was going to harm you

A. Open door
B. Don't open door call police

A lot of people in this forum underestimate how jumpy/jittery someone can be when they have adrenaline pumping through their veins.

Especially how jumpy/jittery you can be when someone is trying to get inside/entering/banging on the door of YOUR HOUSE at an ungodly hour.

 

[nehalem256]

Resonable person question...

If you fear someone at your front door was going to harm you

A. Open door
B. Don't open door call police

Maybe he thought she needed help, or that if he simply open the door and told her to leave she would, and then after he opened the door she acted in a threatening manner?

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Based on the homeowners lawyer's statement, there some type of evidence that shows he was justified. Shot from the gun in the interior wall/s near the door? Victims foot still within the house/door jam area?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/08/renisha-mcbride-shooting_n_4242199.html

Are you saying those things are fact or are they more assumptions? Based on the actual evidence that's out here I don't see how anyone can draw a conclusion and claim it's based purely on evidence.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Are you saying those things are fact or are they more assumptions? Based on the actual evidence that's out here I don't see how anyone can draw a conclusion and claim it's based purely on evidence.

Based on actual evidence that's been released, there's not enough to charge the shooter. All that's been put out by the family/their spokesperson/media has be debunked by the police statements (shot in the back of the head, shot while leaving the porch, shot on the porch and dumped elsewhere).

 

[nehalem256]

Based on actual evidence that's been released, there's not enough to charge the shooter. All that's been put out by the family/their spokesperson/media has be debunked by the police statements (shot in the back of the head, shot while leaving the porch, shot on the porch and dumped elsewhere).

Don't forget the part about how she couldn't call for help because her cellphone was dead, which doesn't really make sense when apparently she already had a someone helping her and then wandered off for 2 hours...

Well I mean just looking at the thread title ^_^

 

[spidey07]

Another treyvon story where the family lies to garner sympathy. She wasn't doing anything wrong, just poor girl looking for help and then gunned down while she was walking away shot in the back and on and on.

Don't want to get shot? Don't try to enter somebody's home in the middle of the night. That's a sure fire way to get dead.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Based on actual evidence that's been released, there's not enough to charge the shooter. All that's been put out by the family/their spokesperson/media has be debunked by the police statements (shot in the back of the head, shot while leaving the porch, shot on the porch and dumped elsewhere).

None of that is evidence that justifies his actions either which is what you claimed. So far the evidence shows nothing conclusive. The evidence is she had an accident, had head trauma, somehow ended up at his home and was shot in the face. The shooter then claimed it was an accidental shooting which in a self defence case could show he didn't actually fear for his life since he didn't intend to discharge his weapon.

There is nothing that shows she attempted to gain entry and there is nothing that demonstrates she acted aggressively towards the home owner.

 

[nehalem256]

None of that is evidence that justifies his actions either which is what you claimed. So far the evidence shows nothing conclusive. The evidence is she had an accident, had head trauma, somehow ended up at his home and was shot in the face.

Is that from the medical report? Or is that just an assumption being made?

The shooter then claimed it was an accidental shooting which in a self defence case could show he didn't actually fear for his life since he didn't intend to discharge his weapon.

Why is it impossible to be in fear of your life and accidentally discharge your weapon?

Is there a requirement to shoot someone the moment you start being afraid for life?