quick question

[tncountryboy]

hey guys, and gals, so if any of you watch channel 4 out of nashville, you might have seen where the georgia woman shot 1 of 3 guys who broke in her home, now, i was having  a discussion with a guy in the comments on Tennessee Law, he seemed to be of the idea, that had it been in tennessee,  even though they broke in this ladys house, that because they were only there to rob it,  she is probably gonna go to jail, now, my comeback was that, if they break into a barn or some outside building, you cant shoot, but if its your HOUSE,  it doesnt really matter there intent, it is presumed that they are there to do you harm, and deadly force is justified. so i guess my question is, who is right

[Chadastrophic]

I would assume if you're in the barn or outbuilding at the time of the break in it would be treated as your house. Just like your vehicle when you are occupying it. 

[nightrunner]

TN Castle Doctrine says if someone enters your home uninvited, you can assume they mean to cause you great bodily injury or death. In turn, law also states if you are in fear of your life or great bodily injury, you can use lethal force to defend yourself.

 

If it's the same video I'm thinking of, she would be in the wrong be cause she was shooting outside her home. Standing in the front door shooting out as they ran away. That would not fly in TN. Once they started to run away, they were no longer a threat. No threat, no shoot.

[Jamie Jackson]

If it was the one in Gwinnett County (Atlanta) here's a link to the vid and 911 call she made.

While her tactic's were certainly lacking and by Monday morning quarter backing there's several flaws easily pointed out...But I have to say I respect her "violence of action"! All there criminals appear to be armed, it appears she was initially hidden, but when she went on the attack the home invaders were scrambling assh**** over elbows getting out of there!

In the "fog" of that moment her actions were most probably moving faster than her ability to process her incoming data/information. While none of us would condone her firing out the door at fleeing felons, it would be a challenge for most, especially an untrained individual to draw those actions back in.

You can see her, as is so typically videoed, firing one handed and running to slide-lock. She needs training, but no one can say she doesn't have the willingness to fight. There's lots of things she could have done better...but she certainly didn't cower in a corner waiting to be killed.

I will also link an additional video that shows the 3 miscreants were in the house for about 5 and 1/2 minutes...longer than the televised video would indicate. 

 

 

[Esko 270]

Good for her.

[300winmag]

The home invaders were armed so I don't think it would have mattered where the incident took place as far as it being a justified homicide.  It could have been in the yard or anywhere in public since they were carrying weapons and an obvious threat to people.

Think about it this way, if they have weapons in their hand, they are still probably a threat when heading out of the house because they can turn right around and shoot the woman.  It isn't like they were running out unarmed and could not hurt anyone.

Edited September 24, 2016 by 300winmag

[tacops]

Like all good Southern Boys...I tip my hat to the lady.

[btq96r]

Not sure how big a mag she had, but it's a good reminder that ammo expenditure and adrenaline have a correlation.  Lucky for her the third intruder got out the way he went instead of doubling back to the front door.

[Jamie Jackson]

9 minutes ago, btq96r said:

Not sure how big a mag she had, but it's a good reminder that ammo expenditure and adrenaline have a correlation.  Lucky for her the third intruder got out the way he went instead of doubling back to the front door.

Excellent point btq. She was very fortunate. Luck always plays a part in something like this.

Training, skill, and preparation enhance luck imho.

[chances R]

Yes she fired out the door but it looks like a continuance of the fight.  In fact, there appears to be a flash, possibly from another shot from the BG.  Given the violent nature of home invasion and disparity of force of 3 armed males and one woman I doubt any prosecutor would want to challange the Castle Doctrine defense in GA.

[tncountryboy]

thanks guys

[300winmag]

Yeah those criminals were a threat to life both inside and outside a house.  It is kind of like how some bank robbers may run off without a weapon at hand and may not be a threat, such as if they used a note.  But then you have bank robbers that are running off carrying guns that are ready to use and thus would be a threat to life to other people in public say on the sidewalk or street.

That situation in Atlanta was not a home burglary.  That was an armed robbery and also if the robbers shot at the woman attempted murder.   That was a very serious violent felony.

Edited September 25, 2016 by 300winmag

[JayC]

Remember in TN our 'castle doctrine' extends beyond the home proper, to include any covered building that is used by people, as well as the curtilage of the property itself.  Without seeing pictures of the yard outside it's impossible to know if the bad guys were inside the curtliage or not.  But I think all of that is largely irrelevant, any reasonable person would just exchanged gun fire with bad guys inside their home, is likely still in fear of their life at least as long as she kept shooting.

And lets be honest, with that video evidence, no DA in TN would touch this case with a 100' pole, let alone take it to trial.  Unless something else was going on of a criminal nature - selling drugs out of the house for example.

[JAB]

I am no lawyer but I don't think there would be any legal ground in TN to charge the homeowner nor would there be enough public support to do so.  Interestingly, the news report I saw quoted the local sheriff as saying no charges would be filed because the lady, "has the right to protect her home and property."  Not 'her life' but 'her home and property'.  If that was, indeed, a direct quote it is good to hear.  As far as I know Texas is the only state where the law specifically says you can use deadly force to protect property and if Georgia law says the same I did not know it.  It is good, though, to hear common sense from the sheriff.  In fact, as I have said, before, I wish that TN law would change to allow deadly force in defense of property.  That would eliminate any question of whether or not it is legal to shoot some low-life that is robbing one's home.  To me, invading a person's home, armed or not, is a violent violation similar to (although not quite to the level of) rape.  As such, invading and/or robbing someone's home is very different from shoplifiting or even grabbing the cash from the register at a convenience store, etc.  Therefore, to my mind, simply invading someone's home should justify the use of deadly force whether the person is home at the time or comes home and blasts the SOB as he runs out the back door with the home owner's property.  I know that people will say, "Property can be replaced," but that is not always the case.  There are things I own that belonged to deceased family members and friends.  Those things can never be replaced.

Oh, and the report I heard also stated something about the home invaders had placed a pistol to the head of a male (resident?) inside the home.  These wannabe thugs NEEDED desperately to die.

Edited September 28, 2016 by JAB