board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Topic Split: Morality of Self-Defense & Killing Intruder

Post Reply   Page 1 of 25  [ 483 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 3 4 525 »
There are sufficient questions raised in the article to question the verdict
Poll ended at Fri 03 Mar , 2006 7:42 pm
Yes
  
91% [ 10 ]
No
  
9% [ 1 ]
Total votes: 11
Author Message
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Topic Split: Morality of Self-Defense & Killing Intruder
Posted: Thu 16 Feb , 2006 8:45 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Ranger Edit: This topic was split from the Police State thread by LalaithUrwen, 02.18.06.


Railroaded Onto Death Row?
By Radley Balko
Quote:
On Dec. 26, 2001, police in the small town of Prentiss, Miss., executed a marijuana search warrant on a small duplex.

On one side of the duplex lived Jamie Wilson, described in the search warrant and police affidavit as a "known drug dealer." When police pounded on her door, Wilson answered and surrendered. That, of course, is what you'd expect a small-time marijuana dealer to do.

On the other side of the duplex, 20-year-old Cory Maye had fallen asleep in an easy chair. His 18-month-old daughter lay asleep in the next room. Maye had only recently moved out of his parents' home. He had moved in with his girlfriend, because, he says, he wanted to be a father to his daughter. Maye was uncomfortable in his new home, and had expressed concerns to his mother about the seedy neighborhood surrounding it. Still, he promised to stick it out until after the holidays.

Late that night, Maye said he awoke to a furious pounding on his front door. According to his court testimony, he became frightened for his safety, and for the safety of his daughter. He ran back to the bedroom, where his daughter was asleep on the bed. He retrieved the gun he had for home protection, loaded it, chambered a round, and lay down on the floor next to her, hoping the noises and/or intruders outside would subside.

They didn't. Soon enough, Maye says, the door to Maye's bedroom flew open, and a figure entered from the outside. Scared, Maye fired his gun three times.

The figure was police officer Ron Jones, and one of Maye's bullets struck Jones in the abdomen, killing him. Worse for Maye, Jones also happened to be the son of the town's police chief.

The above is Cory Maye's version of events. As you might guess, the police offered a different account of the raid. They say they repeatedly announced they were police, and asked Maye to open up. They say an anonymous informant had told the investigating officer that there was a "large stash" of marijuana in the apartment Cory Maye shared with his girlfriend. And they say Cory Maye knew that Ron Jones was a police officer when he shot him.

A Mississippi jury believed the police. Last year, Cory Maye was found guilty of capital murder, or the intentional killing of a police officer. The same afternoon, he was sentenced to death. And today he sits on Mississippi's death row.

That Cory Maye is even in prison is an appalling failure of Mississippi's criminal justice system. Police had no reason to be in his home that night, much less to break down his door. His case is just the latest in a series of tragic consequences resulting from the overuse of paramilitary tactics when police serve drug warrants.

But it's the details of Cory Maye's case that make it particularly compelling:

Cory Maye had no prior criminal record. He had no history of violence. Police found one gram of ashen marijuana in Maye's apartment (that's about a sixth of a teabag's worth). There was no "large stash," and Cory Maye was no drug dealer. In fact, Maye's name appeared nowhere on the search warrant, only his address and the phrase "persons unknown."

Then there's the matter of the informant. We'll never know who that informant was, nor will we ever know what kind of corroborating investigation was done before securing the warrant. That's because the entire investigation leading up to the raid was conducted by the same Officer Ron Jones who was killed in the raid.

According to District Attorney Buddy McDonald, Jones kept no notes or documentation of his investigation of the Wilson-Maye duplex; and any investigation he may have done, in the words of McDonald, "died with Officer Jones."

Cory Maye may well have been a recreational pot smoker. But then, possession of a misdemeanor amount of pot doesn't justify an armed home invasion. Cory Maye may also have fired his gun too quickly. But what would you have done? You have no criminal record. You aren't a dangerous person. You have no reason to think police would break into your home in the middle of the night. You awake to find that your home is under attack. The door flies open. Do you wait to see who it is? Or do you defend your family?

Don't think it can't happen. There are dozens of examples of late night "no-knock" drug raids executed on the wrong home, or on people guilty of, at worst, misdemeanor offenses. Any gun owner willing to defend his family from intruders could well be in the same position Cory Maye was in four years ago.

At the very worst, Maye is guilty of recklessness. It's horrifying to think he could be executed for an error in judgment, an error compounded by volatile circumstances, a frightening assault, and high-stakes drama, none of which were of his making.

But it gets worse. For the last 10 years, Bob Evans has been public defender for the town of Prentiss. Late last year, Evans says he was warned by town officials not to represent Cory Maye in his appeal. Evans ignored the threats, and gave Maye representation. In January of this year, Prentiss made good on its promise, and fired Evans.

According to Evans, Prentiss Mayor Charlie Dumas told him point blank that he was terminated for representing Cory Maye. In a phone interview, Mayor Dumas confirmed having a conversation with Evans, but declined to go into specifics. Calls to the town's aldermen weren't returned, or were answered with "no comment."

If Evans version of events are true, the firing of Evans stinks. It's the kind of thing public officials do when they have something to hide. And it only adds to the already obvious notion that the town of Prentiss doesn't much care about giving Cory Maye a fair shake at justice.

Cory Maye should unite both liberal death penalty foes and conservative gun rights advocates. If Tookie Wilson's execution bothered you, Maye's should terrify you. And if you're troubled by Waco, you should be outraged by Prentiss.

I think Maye deserves an apology. He certainly doesn't deserve death.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Fri 24 Feb , 2006 7:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Feb , 2006 8:52 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14779
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
Quote:
Cory Maye had no prior criminal record. He had no history of violence. Police found one gram of ashen marijuana in Maye's apartment (that's about a sixth of a teabag's worth). There was no "large stash," and Cory Maye was no drug dealer. In fact, Maye's name appeared nowhere on the search warrant, only his address and the phrase "persons unknown."
None of which gave him any right to kill somebody.
Quote:
At the very worst, Maye is guilty of recklessness.
No, he was guilty of murder, even if his version of the story is true.
Quote:
He certainly doesn't deserve death.
True, but I oppose the death penalty for (practically) anybody so....


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Feb , 2006 9:49 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
He shot a home invader. If it were indeed a burglar instead of an unannounced cop, everyone would be calling him a hero.

If his side of the story is to be believed, he did have a right to kill because he was defending himself, his family, and his home. I'd kill to protect those.

Don't you think it's suspicious that the public defender was fired for defending an accused member of the public?

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Thu 16 Feb , 2006 9:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Feb , 2006 9:51 pm
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2952
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
yovargas wrote:
Quote:
At the very worst, Maye is guilty of recklessness.
No, he was guilty of murder, even if his version of the story is true.
In his version of the story, he shot an unknown intruder who broke down his door during the night. That's murder???


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Feb , 2006 9:56 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14779
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
If I brake your door, it gives you the right to shoot me?


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Feb , 2006 9:58 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
If someone breaks down my door in the middle of the night, especially if they don't tell me who they are, then yes, it does.

For all I know the person who is breaking down my door is going to kill us. Or rape us. Or rape us and kill us. Or kill us and rape us. The very fact that the intruder is breaking down the door is evidence of threat.


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Feb , 2006 10:27 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14779
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
"evidence of threat" does not justify use of killing force. Imagine if the police were to use that same standard!

EDIT: plus, I find it highly unlikely that the guy didn't realize it was the cops.


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Feb , 2006 10:55 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Evidence of a threat does justify lethal force, although the objective is to use the minimum force neceessary.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Feb , 2006 11:28 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
When I first arrived in the US and was being shown a gun collection by my father-in-law, he told me it was legal to shoot at an intruder in your home, and that if the intruder died it would not be murder. Was he incorrect?

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Feb , 2006 11:39 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
He was not incorrect. The difference is that this intruder was a police officer, and all the other officers testified that this officer announced himself.

After all, the police never do anything wrong, do they?


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Feb , 2006 12:24 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14779
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
Cenedril_Gildinaur wrote:
He was not incorrect. The difference is that this intruder was a police officer, and all the other officers testified that this officer announced himself.

After all, the police never do anything wrong, do they?
Come on now, if a cop breaks down your door even if they do it without proper procedure, it's not a threat to your life. Killing force should only be useable when your life is in danger - in self-defense, not property-defense.


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Feb , 2006 1:30 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2952
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
yovargas wrote:
Come on now, if a cop breaks down your door even if they do it without proper procedure, it's not a threat to your life.
But if you don't know it's the police, and there's a chance he'll shoot first if you hesitate, then what's a guy to do?

But I agree that it's unlikely he didn't at least suspect it was police knocking on the door.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Feb , 2006 1:34 am
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Police chief wants surveillance cameras in Houston apartments
Quote:
Houston's police chief is suggesting putting surveillance cameras in apartment complexes, downtown streets and even private homes.
What a supreme idiot..

panopticon

\Pa*nop"ti*con\, n. [NL. See Pan-, and Optic.] 1. A prison so contructed that the inspector can see each of the prisoners at all times, without being seen.

Quote:
Killing force should only be useable when your life is in danger - in self-defense, not property-defense.
But if it was dark, how was he to know it wasn't someone prepared to put his life in danger?

Last edited by Iavas_Saar on Fri 17 Feb , 2006 1:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Feb , 2006 1:35 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14779
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
Dave_LF wrote:
yovargas wrote:
Come on now, if a cop breaks down your door even if they do it without proper procedure, it's not a threat to your life.
But if you don't know it's the police, and there's a chance he'll shoot first if you hesitate, then what's a guy to do?
So, without having any idea who it was or why they were trying to get in, he shoots the person entering three times? Shoot first and ask questions later? I don't know what the law says but in my book, that's murder.


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Feb , 2006 1:44 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2952
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
yovargas wrote:
So, without having any idea who it was or why they were trying to get in, he shoots the person entering three times? Shoot first and ask questions later? I don't know what the law says but in my book, that's murder.
There's only one question that needs to be answered in this case: is this person committing an act of violent aggression against an innocent person? If he's breaking into your house in the middle of the night, the answer is yes. If the homeowner is willing to accept the risks associated with further assessing the situation before taking action that's their choice, but I don't think there's an obligation to do that.


Top
Profile Quote
Onizuka Eikichi
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Feb , 2006 2:07 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed 19 Oct , 2005 9:56 pm
Location: Outside of Causality
Contact: ICQ
 
Dave_LF wrote:
yovargas wrote:
So, without having any idea who it was or why they were trying to get in, he shoots the person entering three times? Shoot first and ask questions later? I don't know what the law says but in my book, that's murder.
There's only one question that needs to be answered in this case: is this person committing an act of violent aggression against an innocent person? If he's breaking into your house in the middle of the night, the answer is yes. If the homeowner is willing to accept the risks associated with further assessing the situation before taking action that's their choice, but I don't think there's an obligation to do that.
Correct.

There are some training courses you can take I believe that train you for those situations to minimize the conflict. Usually involves "aggressive bargaining" if you follow me. ;)

_________________

冬ながら
空より花の
散り来るは
雲のあなたに
春にやあるらん


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Feb , 2006 3:50 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
yovargas wrote:
Cenedril_Gildinaur wrote:
He was not incorrect. The difference is that this intruder was a police officer, and all the other officers testified that this officer announced himself.

After all, the police never do anything wrong, do they?
Come on now, if a cop breaks down your door even if they do it without proper procedure, it's not a threat to your life. Killing force should only be useable when your life is in danger - in self-defense, not property-defense.
According to his story, he didn't know it was a cop. All he knew was that it was the middle of the night, it was dark, and this guy just broke down his door.

Of course I'd shoot.

And at that point, you don't know whether it is self defense or property defense, and I consider the difference between them to be irrelevant at 3 am. There are news stories about burglaries that turned into assaults or murders because the home owners happened to be home. The guy who committs acts of aggression to steal your stuff is unlikely to hesitate regarding acts of aggresesion against you to steal your stuff.

If a home invader doesn't want to be shot, he should do all the "further assessing" before invading. Such as clearly announcing "This is the Police!"

This man is probably being rail-roaded because he defended himself from a police officer. Self defense is a right, but apparently not against government thugs. I consider the firing of the public defender proof of the guilt of the city.


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Feb , 2006 3:56 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14779
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
Again, I don't know what the law is, but in my moral world, you don't shoot until you're damn sure your life is in danger because until then it is NOT self-defense.


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Feb , 2006 3:58 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
In my wolrd, someone breaking down my door at 3am is threatening my life unless they prove otherwise, and the burden of proof is on them not me.


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Feb , 2006 4:01 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14779
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
In your world, that cop is dead. In mine, he's alive.


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 25  [ 483 posts ]
Return to “The Symposium” | Jump to page 1 2 3 4 525 »
Jump to: