Homeowner charged with manslaughter for shooting at home invasion suspects: What Went Wrong?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

dennishoddy

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
84,951
Reaction score
62,828
Location
Ponca City Ok
There was a case years ago where a homeowner in OKC chased down a vehicle that was leaving his home after a violent break in. Homeowner shot and killed the guy at a stoplight. Was not charged.
I don't know all of the details why that happened, but it was many years ago before we had the Castle Doctrine.
Always wondered how the homeowner was not charged.
 

tou860

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 12, 2014
Messages
249
Reaction score
47
Location
Northeast Oklahoma
So in other unless your in the home and the burglars are inside home posing a threat you can defend yourself? But if you see them fleeing from your home do not shoot at them and just try to get some sort of evidence like license plate car type and call 911....
 

firefighterguy

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 19, 2014
Messages
454
Reaction score
79
Location
Edmond
It wasn't that they were fleeing, it was that they were in their car and fleeing and didn't pose a threat any longer.

It all goes back to, " would a reasonable person believe a threat was still present"?

Andrew Branca says there are 5 criteria for a valid self defense shooting.

1. innocence
2. Imminence
3. Proportionality
4. Avoidance (duty to retreat)
5. Reasonableness

The guy in the story was fine on 1. 2 was a no and 3 was probably a yes. We could argue 4 all day so let's leave it out. 5 was a huge no.

So for a shoot to be legal you need 5/5. If you don't have 1 of the 5 you're gonna need a lawyer. This dude had 2/5 maybe 3/5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Sanford

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
3,702
Reaction score
298
Location
40 Miles S. of Nowhere, OK.
It wasn't that they were fleeing, it was that they were in their car and fleeing and didn't pose a threat any longer.

It all goes back to, " would a reasonable person believe a threat was still present"?

Andrew Branca says there are 5 criteria for a valid self defense shooting.

1. innocence
2. Imminence
3. Proportionality
4. Avoidance (duty to retreat)
5. Reasonableness

The guy in the story was fine on 1. 2 was a no and 3 was probably a yes. We could argue 4 all day so let's leave it out. 5 was a huge no.

So for a shoot to be legal you need 5/5. If you don't have 1 of the 5 you're gonna need a lawyer. This dude had 2/5 maybe 3/5.
And if one of the people in the car is pointing a gun back as they flee the whole balance shifts back the other way?
Also doesn't #4 depends greatly on local law? I thought I remembered that in OK there was no "duty to retreat"?
Of course #5 always depends on which side of the gun one's on.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom