Man arrested after shooting escaping car jacker

[ServiceSoon]

No reason to call the shooter a thug. We the THR community don’t like to be called gun nuts, NRA freaks, etc so I think it is in our best interest not to call this person is a thug.

If BOTH the thief and the shooter are being charged with the SAME murder of the third guy, isn’t that double-jeopardy and thus unconstitutional?

Double jeopardy is being charged with the same crime twice. Basically if you are charged with the 1st degree murder of Fred and you plead not guilty and win, you can not be charged with the 1st degree murder of Fred again.

 

[brerrabbit]

But it makes an interesting case for the second trial if someone else has already been convicted in his death. It also brings about all kinds of defense options that normally do not happen.

 

[Don Gwinn]

KCMarine, that wasn't me. RancidSumo said he thought this would be legal. I recommended he not try it out without finding out for sure. He quoted me and forgot to use the Quote feature to do it.

 

[Technosavant]

No reason to call the shooter a thug. We the THR community don’t like to be called gun nuts, NRA freaks, etc so I think it is in our best interest not to call this person is a thug.

Got a better description for a gang-banger wannabe who runs around with a weapon possessed illegally, doing stupid things, and shoots at people not directly involved with a crime?

Whatever he may be, it ferdangsure isn't a poster child for the RKBA movement. If that's the best we have, we might as well get the guns ready for the authorities to pick them up, because they WILL get banned if we act like that.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

IANAL but as I understand it.....

If BOTH the thief and the shooter are being charged with the SAME murder of the third guy, isnt that double-jeopardy and thus unconstitutional?

Double jeopardy would be if the shooter got acquitted in criminal court
and the DA tried to charge and try him for the same crime with
another judge or jury. In this case, the car thief caused the shooting
bears as much responsibility as the shooter, kinda like accessory
before the fact.

BOTH the thief and the shooter contributed to the situation where the
third guy was shot; if the thief had not stolen the car, the shooter
would not have been motivated to shoot; if the shooter had held fire
since his life and limb were not in danger and shooting would not lead
to recovery of his property anyway, the third guy would not have been
shot.

Think of the thief as contributing to the shooting as much as
much as the guy who got shot contributed to the car theft by
transporting the thief. In fact, the guy who got shot contributed to
his own shooting by enabling the car thief to steal the car, prompting
the car owner to shoot.

Note that if the shooter were acquitted in criminal court, he could not
be retried for the original charge; he could be tried in civil court for
wrongful death, or in federal court for civil rights violation, but those
are seperate issues.