Need translation, from lawspeak to normalspeak

[BobR]

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

Just what is "apprehend a design", and "design being accomplished", in the context of the above law.

The whole enchilada...

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.050

This law will have quite a bit of bearing in an upcoming trial here in Spokane.

bob

[makattak]

"Apprehend a design": It appears to you that the person you killed had an intention to and was about to hurt someone or commit a major crime.

(And, of course, the other point in the gobbledygook is that you must have REASONABLY thought he was about to, and intended to...)

[CNYCacher]

"design" in this sense is used like "planning", "plans" or "intentions".

Bob designed to rob the 7-11.

"apprehend"  in this sense means to "understand", to "get it"

Tom apprehended Bob's design as soon as he saw the knife come out, and shot him in the face before such design being accomplished.

[BobR]

This one has divided the community. Guy left his car running to warm up, dirtbag with many priors, including 5 prior auto thefts, was walking by and  decided he needed the car. Car owner got off one shot as Suburban was driving away at ~ 50mph. I am not sure of the distance, but it was far enough away to be considered gone (50+ feet). Sub owner made either a very lucky shot, or very unlucky shot, depending on how you look at it. Bullet through back window, headrest and into DBs head, who then died and crashed Suburban. Decision was just made to charge shooter with manslaughter, some wanted murder, and he will be arraigned in June.

We don't have a castle law in WA, although it probably wouldn't matter in this case. Rather than legislation, i.e., castle doctrine, we actually have case law that says we have no duty to retreat. I think it will come down to how fed up the jury is with the lack of policing here, and the ability of a person to protect his property.

http://www.khq.com/story/22452088/man-who-shot-car-theif

bob

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

what are the weapons charges?

[Brad Johnson]

In Texas two things would have had to happen for that to be a legit shoot.

A)  There has to be a "threat of imminent serious bodily injury or death", or

B)  The vehicle would have to represent an irrecoverable or irreplaceable asset that would put an immediate and serious burden on the shooter's ability to provide for their livelihood.  (Example:  You are a mobile repair guy who works out of the service truck that contains all your parts, tools, and records.  The truck IS your business.  So someone stealing it would be, in essence, putting you out of business in an immediate and irrevocable basis.)

Since the perp was driving away the "threat of immediate serious bodily injury or death" did not exist.  You didn't mention anything about the vehicle being other than an average everyday conveyance, so I will presume just that.

In many states leaving a car running with the keys in the ignition, even if locked, is a no-no.  In Texas it's a misdemeanor offense.  If your car happens to get stolen as a result, not only will they slap you with a citation, your insurance company will no-no the claim.  (Check your auto policy.  I bet it specifically talks about losses due to negligence, and how claims for such will be denied.  In other words, if you create a condition that makes it reasonably easy to get in the car and drive away, you can say goodbye to any help from your insurer.)  If a citation is issue to the shooter for not securing the vehicle, that will be a huge problem for his defense.  The prosecution will use that to assert that the vehicle must not have been very important to the shooter or he would have taken more care in securing it.  This goes directly to part B above.

Sounds like the shooter is in mucho hot water no matter how scummy the vehicle thief might have been.  If the above scenario is even remotely accurate, his only real hope will be some legal technicality, one helluva good defense attorney, or jury nullification.

Brad

[MillCreek]

We discussed this back when it first occurred.  Based on what I have read in the Spokane and Seattle media, I continue to believe it was a bad shoot, and manslaughter charges are appropriate.  The Washington state case law generally does not support using deadly force to protect property when there was no danger to the person exerting the deadly force.  There have been a number of convictions over the years on this very subject.

[Hawkmoon]

We discussed this back when it first occurred.  Based on what I have read in the Spokane and Seattle media, I continue to believe it was a bad shoot, and manslaughter charges are appropriate.  The Washington state case law generally does not support using deadly force to protect property when there was no danger to the person exerting the deadly force.  There have been a number of convictions over the years on this very subject.

Agreed. Certainly not murder, but shooting at a fleeing bandito who poses no threat to you is never a good shoot. Either manslaughter or negligent homicide would work, but I think manslaughter is more appropriate.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

plus in this case the suburban did a lot of damage on impact

[BobR]

Yea, this guy is probably going to jail. A lot of people, mainly those fed up with escalating crime and no enforcement, feel he did the right thing. Personally, I don't think he should have pulled the trigger. I will be surprised if the trial is held in Spokane, too much publicity here.

bob

[Tallpine]

plus in this case the suburban did a lot of damage on impact

Not much of the vehicle left to recover, I suppose 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

vehicle did better than house. a lot better

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2

[MechAg94]

Yea, this guy is probably going to jail. A lot of people, mainly those fed up with escalating crime and no enforcement, feel he did the right thing. Personally, I don't think he should have pulled the trigger. I will be surprised if the trial is held in Spokane, too much publicity here.

bob

I would agree that it was not a wise shot and jail time is likely.  This sort of scenario is brought up in most serious discussions on self defense and it is nearly always said to be a bad idea.  

However, were I on the jury, I am not sure i could convict him of manslaughter or murder.  Assuming he is an otherwise standup guy, we gain nothing by punishing him.  

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

i think i could convict. just would give him a light sentence

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2

[MechAg94]

i think i could convict. just would give him a light sentence

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2

Down this way, I don't think the jury gets to decide that.  The only murder trial I sat on, all we could do was decide between two levels of murder.  The judge set the sentence based a lot on the fact that the guy was a pimp and drug dealer with lots of priors. 

I feels more like a judgement call at this point.  Not sure.  I won't be on the jury anyway.  He needs one of his  "supporters" to end up in the jury pool.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

here the jury recommends sentence  judge can only reduce that recomendation

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2