pawdalaw
Superstar
ukk what yall talking about, cc's have a duty to retreat. New York ain't a stand your ground.
Two men fatally shot outside their East Flatbush home (NSFW)(Update: Cops kill the killer)
- Thread starter Blessings
- Start date
null
...
You would be a horrible defense lawyer there is no way self-defense could be used in this when there were multiple gun shut wounds to both deceased men and there is proof with the video. Secondly, there is information where the murderer was a former correctional officer at Sing Sing and he was let go. Get your facts straight before you play amateur lawyer.
Both deceased men had shots to the body and to the head. Self defense is not overkill.
If a medical examiner testified with autopsy reports your self-defense claim would be thrown in the trash...
step by step.
your jumbled thinking is why you draw those conclusions.
there are two homicides.
the son running towards the shooter (also probably no in a sane state of mind) gives the shooter GREATER pretext to shoot.
get in an altercation with a police officer and then try and run towards him while he is holding his gun.
see what happens.
"facts"?
"medical examiner"
watch too much TV brehs.
homicide != murder the critical question is "intent"
example:
Sally Challen walks free as court rules out retrial for killing abusive husband
Woman sentenced to time served after crown accepts guilty plea to manslaughter
www.theguardian.com
who would i be arguing with someone who doesn't even know the basics.
BOBBIT cut off her husband's
and walked free due to mental impairmentDiminished responsibility - Wikipedia
Irresistible impulse - Wikipedia
dont @me
i can't talk about this with people who don't even understand legal basics.just watch for his lawyers
The wife's an idiot for distracting the husband.
The husband an idiot for putting scissors to the man's face/neck.
The shooter is an idiot for overdoing it...Had he just shot the husband 1 or 2 times he probably would gotten a very light sentence.
SMH at the wife arguing with the man in the hallway then trying to pull her husband away.....If you don't want your husband involved in an altercation, why are you arguing with a man in the hallway?
Question?..... Is there any video of the man trying to kick down their door or did the wife make that up?...... I see the shooting but don't see the man kicking in their door.
The husband an idiot for putting scissors to the man's face/neck.
The shooter is an idiot for overdoing it...Had he just shot the husband 1 or 2 times he probably would gotten a very light sentence.
SMH at the wife arguing with the man in the hallway then trying to pull her husband away.....If you don't want your husband involved in an altercation, why are you arguing with a man in the hallway?
Question?..... Is there any video of the man trying to kick down their door or did the wife make that up?...... I see the shooting but don't see the man kicking in their door.
null
...
sort of obvious isn't it ...?
the fact that you have to point it out is just ...
Walking up to to the dad and shooting him point blank got him life
Hopefully they catch him soon
Hopefully they catch him soon
Going by some of the comments in this thread, it’s not. Unfortunately, this thread is chalked full of people making up assumptions from a non-audio video and not even bother reading the article to help fill in the gaps.
NYChase718
Veteran
smh I didn’t see/read a lot of comments in here but when I came looking for an update I saw a big ass picture showing the guy shooting the man in the back and the person who posted it was explaining it’s not self defense…sad it has to be explained…some cats fancy themselves smart enough to argue the stupidest points
anyway dude is going down…it’s not up for debate…this is the reason why it’s extremely difficult to get a CCW in NYC…too many hot tempers in such a large, congested city…maybe the only chance he would have of getting off would be if there was no video evidence and he was able to get a sympathetic jury to side with whatever version of the story he came up with (this actually happened on a case I was on…we knew it wasn’t self defense which dude lawyer was arguing but the prosecution took manslaughter off the table and was going strictly for first degree and we felt it was too harsh…breh killed a guy who robbed him…no tape but the physical evidence strongly suggested he shot the dude once when his hands were up and again when he was on the floor…all of us were black except for one juror…and for the most part we had no sympathy for the robber…if manslaughter was on the table we would’ve went with that…ultimately dude did do time tho for just gun possession)…this tape is damning tho.
Last edited:
Dynamite James
The Main attraction
Shut up
I know, my comment makes sense.
Wargames
One Of The Last Real Ones To Do It
Actually no in that situation he is suppose to run down the stairs and try to escape. You can only claim self defense if you can’t escape. The fact he was kicking the door probably means he’ll get charged with second degree murder and do life in jail no parole, because a prosecutor is going to say he went there with intent to start a conflict and kill. He might of got parole if there wasn’t video but that video and sequence of events is going to see him die in jail.
if he had shot the father when he put the scissors in his face maybe…. He would of even had that excuse for pulling the gun out, but he then shot the father as he was walking away. Also that John Wock head shot at the end…. Nope no judge is going to give self defense instructions to the jury because it would be a wasting everyone’s time to ask the prosecutor to argue against it because they’ll just point out how the killer ignored several opportunities to escape and not do violence. No responsible person kills two people because someone put a pair of scissors in their face and yelled at them.a lawyer would say.
first thing first.
literally.
there was a sequence of events.
by the end the man could claim that he was no longer in a sane state of mind. he could have disassociated. they could claim temporary insanity (based on the severity of events before). he might have provable PTSD because he seemed to have combat skills.
we do not know what they said to each other.
for RANDOM example:
big man: i'm gonna cut your throat ()holds scissors)
little man: afraid to pull out the gun in defence because of CLOSE proximity. knows he is not strong enough. fears for his life.
woman: distraction
big man: woman get out of here let me deal with this man how he deserves.
big man: turns to approach small man again. (safe to presume willing to put the scissors to neck again to escalate threat). little man fears for his life.
woman: pulls big man and by doing so creates distance between the two men.
big man pushes woman away in a half turn position "says he will sort out little man" presumably ready put the scissors to his throat again.
small man knowing that if big man gets too close he will be defenceless shoots to fend out presumed ensuing attack *based on what was said*.
...
if big man had attacked small man before or threatened him ... then
there is six years of history and any lawyer will in the best interests of his client, given the size differential and the scissors, will aim for some form of self-defence.
i used to think that anyone could study law but some people just cannot reason
preemptive action based on anticipated attack is allowed under self-defence ..
"When the use of deadly force is involved in a self-defense claim, the person must also reasonably believe that their use of deadly force is immediately necessary to prevent the other's infliction of great bodily harm or death"
Self-defense (United States) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
scissors to the throat is more than reasonable grounds to believe. especially if there was violence in their history.
MAYBE if he has a record of being attacked in jail as a CO he can argue he had an extreme emotional response and try to get the charge knocked down to manslaughter, but that is going to be one hell of a stretch and there being video of everything really undercuts that defense. Especially the John wick brain shot. Breh is fukked and likely dying in jail. He’s a 47 year old, maybe if he was younger he would get out eventually but at his age he is fukked.
Last edited:
null
...
did YOU watch the video carefully?
he took the elevator down someone said ... indicating that maybe he has some sort of impairment when walking.
LOOK at the video. he is leaning on the stairs to support himself when big guy comes out.
And when he walks towards big guy he doesn't bend his left leg properly.
It's looks like he is not fully able bodied.
did you miss that?
... not my fault you cannot spot the clues
also not true.
you do not have to prove that you could not escape.
you keep ignoring the element of subjective belief (including autism) in self-defence.
that is why the first thing police say is "I WAS IN FEAR OF MY LIFE - I.E. I BELIEVED A SERIOUS ATTACK WAS IMMINENT "
i posted two women above . one killed her verbally abusive husband. the other one cut off his *** and threw it away.
both walked free from court.
if he went there to kill maybe he would have shot the kid at the end in cold blood. maybe he would have gone after mama. maybe he would have shot big guy instead of waiting around.
if you want to kill someone you do not have to start a conflict first.
if you kick someone's door they might just call the police on you. that plus video means he losses.
look at all talking and explanatory gesticulating. he was trying to explain something.
national habit of making statements of consequence even if they are total BS ..
no because they were too close together. he would risk losing the gun.
do you remember the bobbit case? or the case of the women who killed her verbally abusive husband?
(expecting an answer here ...)
i said what the defence will say but you have gone and tried the entire case.
let's revisit this.
also: did the wife say his husband didn't have a weapon. a lawyer might use that to cast doubt on her testimony on what was said.
nikkas in here acting like Perry Mason and then victim blaming.
Trash
Trash
Wargames
One Of The Last Real Ones To Do It
You can’t kill someone based on words. Even if you want to say he couldn’t get down the stairs as soon as the father turned away his argument for being threatened ceased. This isn’t the 1980’s with Goetz and even then the argument “what was reasonable for me“ as a subjective term didn’t fly then, and he was a white man that got off for racism and a lack of tape. The tape shows the father walking away. Then add the story this is a six year disagreement, he attempted to kick in the door, and used a deadly weapon to kill the father and son. The wife’s testimony isn’t going to be scrutinized like that tape either. If the father had stabbed him with the scissors he would have a defense, hell he actually has a defense for drawing his weapon based on a perceived threat. However, the NYPL has no heat of the moment statute, so once he started shooting he was fukked.did YOU watch the video carefully?
he took the elevator down someone said ... indicating that maybe he has some sort of impairment when walking.
LOOK at the video. he is leaning on the stairs to support himself when big guy comes out.
And when he walks towards big guy he doesn't bend his left leg properly.
It's looks like he is not fully able bodied.
did you miss that?
... not my fault you cannot spot the clues
also not true.
you do not have to prove that you could not escape.
you keep ignoring the element of subjective belief (including autism) in self-defence.
that is why the first thing police say is "I WAS IN FEAR OF MY LIFE - I.E. I BELIEVED A SERIOUS ATTACK WAS IMMINENT "
i posted two women above . one killed her verbally abusive husband. the other one cut off his *** and threw it away.
both walked free from court.
if he went there to kill maybe he would have shot the kid at the end in cold blood. maybe he would have gone after mama. maybe he would have shot big guy instead of waiting around.
if you want to kill someone you do not have to start a conflict first.
if you kick someone's door they might just call the police on you. that plus video means he losses.
look at all talking and explanatory gesticulating. he was trying to explain something.
national habit of making statements of consequence even if they are total BS ..
no because they were too close together. he would risk losing the gun.
do you remember the bobbit case? or the case of the women who killed her verbally abusive husband?
(expecting an answer here ...)
i said what the defence will say but you have gone and tried the entire case.
let's revisit this.
also: did the wife say his husband didn't have a weapon. a lawyer might use that to cast doubt on her testimony on what was said.
Also this is the internet so I am going to express my opinion and I think this is a easy second degree case because of the tape. How are you going to tell a jury the defendant felt threatened when he took the time to walk over and finish the father with a head shot? The judge isn’t going to explain self defense to the jury and require the prosecution to be forced to prove it didn’t happen because of the head shot. That alone turns that murder into intent to kill. After shooting the father and killing the son he walked over to the barely alive father and shot him in the head. The defendant is fukked because of the tape.
Last edited: