<p>Have any of you heard this story? </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/25/justice/california-slain-burglar-pregnant/”>Man, 80, to be charged for killing 'pregnant' intruder? - CNN;
<p>I’m the stereotypical urban liberal elite who abhors guns, would never own one and you know something – I say good for him. You break into my home, all bets are off. </p>
<p>Ditto, pizza girl. In what universe can a burglar claim special consideration? </p>
<p>They didn’t just break in, they beat him and broke his bones before he got to his gun and he is 80 years old! It’s awful and I’m sure it will haunt him but I can’t fault the homeowner for what he did. </p>
<p>This episode makes me want to learn how to shoot & get a gun (no longer kids in the house). I have no sympathy for the burglars, and respect for the 80 y.o. homeowner.</p>
<p>If he shot her while they both were already fleeing, and he chased after them, it is going to be tough for the self-defense arguments… More like a revenge shooting. At least what the article implies. </p>
<p>Poor guy! He was burglarized 4 times, and this time was beaten, too! What kind of scum beats an 80 yr old man?!</p>
<p>One fly in the ointment regarding the celebration of this senior’s actions, he shot the self-proclaimed pregnant woman TWICE in the back after she and her burglary partner had already fled off of his property after seeing his gun so they no longer posted an imminent threat where he could claim self-defense. </p>
<p>Worse, he openly admitted as much in an interview. And in that admission, he fired the second shot after the pregnant woman was already wounded and pleading to not be killed because she was pregnant and said he did it because he wanted to send a message to her crime partner. </p>
<p>Sorry, but legally and in many moral/ethical systems, that crosses the line from self-defense to deliberate murder. </p>
<p><a href=“80-year-old man says he shot, killed pregnant woman trying to rob him”>http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-suspect-killed-long-beach-robbery-20140723-story.html</a></p>
<p>He really said all that?</p>
<p>Well, looks like he just shot himself in the foot. </p>
<p>The police statement says he fired on them when they were still inside his home. They fled and he followed them, shooting again. It was at that point, apparently, that she was killed. </p>
<p>I wonder if they can use the fact that he was robbed 4 times and that he thought it was the same people and that they would come back to successfully plead that his persistence was, in his mind, self-defense…</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I have heard that argument and dont buy it. How do we know that they arent leaving to get their own gun from their car. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While that defense may fly in some states/regions, it’s unlikely to fly in the state of California considering their stance on self-defense and use of guns in such situations tends to be more restrictive. </p>
<p>It would also depend on the given juror pool and the prosecution will do its best to reject as many burglary/crime victims who may be sympathetic to the likely defendant from the juror pool as possible. </p>
<p>So, she wasnt pregnant??</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I agree with Pizzagirl. I’m as anti gun as one can get. Would never own one, can’t stand the fact that others can get them. But when I read this story, I felt sympathy for him. He’s been robbed four times, they beat him and he’s 80. Good for him. I hope they caught her accomplice and he serves a lot of time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The problem is in the more restrictive self-defense laws in some states like California, self-defense cannot be invoked the moment the “imminent threat” is gone…such as the burglars fleeing after seeing a gun and/or being shot at. </p>
<p>When one continues to chase after them off of one’s property and shoots one or more of them twice, especially after being disabled by a prior shot, that no longer constitutes self-defense except in certain notorious states which will remain unnamed. </p>
<p>If the above is cited as a defense, one possible question a California judge or prosecutor may ask is, Why didn’t you lock the door/go to a neighbor’s home and call the cops rather than take such a drastic step of shooting a fleeing burglar…and then doing it twice after the first shot already wounded one of the burglars?</p>
<p>One thing’s for sure, whoever takes him on as his attorney is going to wish in the back of his/her mind that he invoked his 5th amendment rights with the press and cops in light of that interview…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ok…I’ll bite. If the male suspect is being charged with felony murder in Miller’s death…how can Greer also be charged?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Depending on the circumstances and the relevant local/state/federal laws, multiple people can be charged and possibly found guilty for someone’s death. </p>
<p>Shooting a fleeing burglar is not self-defense. It’s vigilantism, and he should be prosecuted for murder, because he murdered her.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For those who want to read California law on the subject of justifiable homicide, see Penal Code 197-199:
<a href=“http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199”>http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199</a></p>
<p>Note that the surviving accused burglar/robber is also being charged with murder based on Penal Code 190.2(d). Yes, if a group of criminals is committing one of the crimes listed, and one of the criminals dies, the others may be charged with murder of their dead accomplice, whether or not someone else may also be charged.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>More than one person may be charged with the murder of a single person, if more than one had participated in illegal action to cause that person’s death.</p>
<p>Note: the dead suspect was not pregnant, according to an autopsy.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/article/Man-80-says-he-shot-burglar-after-pregnancy-plea-5646010.php”>http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/article/Man-80-says-he-shot-burglar-after-pregnancy-plea-5646010.php</a></p>
<p>I live in a “stand your ground” state. I have a very high security house. But if you break in, you get shot! If I don’t shoot you, my wife or neighbor or kids will. Criminals have the right to stay out of my house. These criminals showed the homeowner no mercy; what is wrong with people!!!</p>
<p>Many people believe in “stand your ground”, even more, I suspect, believe in the right of self-defense. I think few would disagree with the right of a homeowner to shoot those that break in his house and pose a threat, frugaldr. I think all would agree the criminals showed no mercy to the resident while they were in his house. The problem here, frugaldr., is that so far, it appears the suspects were out of the house and running away when shot. If this holds true, it may be said that shooting people that are running away is not self-defense. </p>