\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 http://www.buffalonews.com/city/police-courts/courts/article314906.ece
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 Well your title is misleading. Apparently there is a castle law in NY. But the ambulance chasers forgot for a minute.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 Well your title is misleading. Apparently there is a castle law in NY. But the ambulance chasers forgot for a minute. What an indictment on the mindset of the widow of this guy and the attorney representing her. I live in Albany, grew up in WNY so this was very interesting to watch. I am actually surprised it went away relatively quickly out here, I assumed there would be much more coverage here than there was. In any event, you would think there would be some boundaries to this type of legal action. Let's jump to the end here----the shooting was tragic for all involved. It would appear the guy got confused and/or disoriented---but do you assume someone in your house in the middle of the night is NOT up to something? By all accounts, the homeowner called out, offered the guy a chance to flee, but didn't. By the time he makes it to your stairs, the homeowner has to be thinking it's about to get real ugly in there. Then, of course the obligatory lawsuit has to come along because while the widow is grieving for her tragic loss, a few million would ease the pain. Shameful.
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 What an indictment on the mindset of the widow of this guy and the attorney representing her. I live in Albany, grew up in WNY so this was very interesting to watch. I am actually surprised it went away relatively quickly out here, I assumed there would be much more coverage here than there was. In any event, you would think there would be some boundaries to this type of legal action. Let's jump to the end here----the shooting was tragic for all involved. It would appear the guy got confused and/or disoriented---but do you assume someone in your house in the middle of the night is NOT up to something? By all accounts, the homeowner called out, offered the guy a chance to flee, but didn't. By the time he makes it to your stairs, the homeowner has to be thinking it's about to get real ugly in there. Then, of course the obligatory lawsuit has to come along because while the widow is grieving for her tragic loss, a few million would ease the pain. Shameful. When this first came out in the Buff news some of the comments where along the line of"well he was drunk so the shooting was unjustifiable" So I can get plowed and do whatever I want?
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 When this first came out in the Buff news some of the comments where along the line of"well he was drunk so the shooting was unjustifiable" So I can get plowed and do whatever I want? Exactly. It's only justified if you were robbed and cut into little pieces. How would you know? It seemed to me the homwoener excersized considerable restraint. Tragic, but not suit-worthy.
UConn James Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 After what happened in Cheshire, Conn., I would NEVER vote guilty to anyone shooting someone who came forcefully and uninvited into their home.
DC Tom Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Exactly. It's only justified if you were robbed and cut into little pieces. How would you know? It seemed to me the homwoener excersized considerable restraint. Tragic, but not suit-worthy. Actually, it's probably civil-suit-worthy. But I certainly wouldn't want anyone to win such a suit.
whateverdude Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 So, is there any information as to why the man entered the home? What was his intent.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 20, 2011 Posted January 20, 2011 Actually, it's probably civil-suit-worthy. But I certainly wouldn't want anyone to win such a suit. I'd think the fact that a suit with such egregious personal injury and such potential for splash died on the vine with a whimper clearly points out that it was not civil suit worthy. you'd have to change some of the facts to get most reasonable people to agree it should have it's day in court. i agree it can be lititgated, but there really seems to be nothing leading to the conclusion that is should be litigated.
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 20, 2011 Posted January 20, 2011 Didn't the homeowner see it was their neighbor? Or did they just shoot in the dark at the person?
UConn James Posted January 20, 2011 Posted January 20, 2011 Didn't the homeowner see it was their neighbor? Or did they just shoot in the dark at the person? This man was at a party at the neighbor's house earlier that evening. It wasn't the neighbor. Having a dog probably would've prevented this whole situation. Even for a drunk, a dog's snarl makes for a great motivator to get the hell out.
Recommended Posts