Thread: Legitimate defence of property, or cold-blooded murder?

At another place, there is much outrage being expressed that the three men involved in this killing have been ordered to pay compensation to the child of the deceased.

An El Paso County jury on Friday awarded nearly $300,000 to the daughter of a burglar who was fatally shot in 2009 while breaking into an auto lot.

Parents of the victim, Robert Johnson Fox, embraced their attorneys after a judge announced the jury’s verdict, capping a two-week-long civil trial in which business owner Jovan Milanovic and two relatives were painted as vigilantes who plotted a deadly ambush rather than let authorities deal with a string of recent burglaries.

Read more: http://www.gazette.com/articles/jury...#ixzz1WTwUjL3h

For myself, I am outraged that the three men involved in the shooting were not indicted for murder, and as accomplices to murder, and are not rotting in prison 'for the term of their natural lives'.

What think you?

Originally Posted by Leo2

At another place, there is much outrage being expressed that the three men involved in this killing have been ordered to pay compensation to the child of the deceased.



Read more: http://www.gazette.com/articles/jury...#ixzz1WTwUjL3h

For myself, I am outraged that the three men involved in the shooting were not indicted for murder, and as accomplices to murder, and are not rotting in prison 'for the term of their natural lives'.

What think you?

Bad link. The only time deadly force should be ok is if your life is in danger. I don't have enough info here to make a call on this.

I found the article...

Jury sides with burglar's family in 2009 shooting death at auto lot | jury, burglar, lot - Colorado Springs Gazette, CO

After reading the article, it looks like they were in the wrong for shooting the burgler according to state law. So going by the law, as much as I hate to say it, it looks like the settlement was justified.

Originally Posted by Leo2

At another place, there is much outrage being expressed that the three men involved in this killing have been ordered to pay compensation to the child of the deceased.



Read more: http://www.gazette.com/articles/jury...#ixzz1WTwUjL3h

For myself, I am outraged that the three men involved in the shooting were not indicted for murder, and as accomplices to murder, and are not rotting in prison 'for the term of their natural lives'.

What think you?

From the facts of the article One posted, I can't understand why the three weren't indicted for murder, too, Leo. Yes, they had reason to be enraged, having been victims of thefts THREE times just that week. But, it is not legal to plan to shoot the next thief. And, if it's not legal, then why weren't they indicted?

Milanovic and his father told police a week before the shooting they would shoot any intruders who returned. Police say the men concealed the rifle in the trunk of a car so well that a police detective initially missed it during a search.

The 4th Judicial District Attorney's Office declined to file charges in the shooting, and instead sent the case to a grand jury, which decided against returning an indictment, effectively clearing the trio of criminal wrongdoing.

The civil award has no criminal implications for the Milanovics or Novak.



Read more: Jury sides with burglar's family in 2009 shooting death at auto lot | jury, burglar, lot - Colorado Springs Gazette, CO

As to the award, yea, it seems weird that the child of a thief is being awarded money from those that the thief sought to victimize, but it is a wrongful death suit, and it sure seems like the thief was the victim of wrongful death at their hands.

Originally Posted by Leo2

At another place, there is much outrage being expressed that the three men involved in this killing have been ordered to pay compensation to the child of the deceased.



Read more: http://www.gazette.com/articles/jury...#ixzz1WTwUjL3h

For myself, I am outraged that the three men involved in the shooting were not indicted for murder, and as accomplices to murder, and are not rotting in prison 'for the term of their natural lives'.

What think you?

Hey, is this "leo" from the old PF? A teenager from the U.K? Nice to see you.

Originally Posted by Leo2

At another place, there is much outrage being expressed that the three men involved in this killing have been ordered to pay compensation to the child of the deceased.



Read more: http://www.gazette.com/articles/jury...#ixzz1WTwUjL3h

For myself, I am outraged that the three men involved in the shooting were not indicted for murder, and as accomplices to murder, and are not rotting in prison 'for the term of their natural lives'.

What think you?

We have the right to defend our property, this isn't the UK.

Knife-wielding trespassing methheads, with the only collaborating testimony being a partner who whomself was just as guilty of robbing and vandalizing the lot over a lengthy period of time and strung out at the time of the incident... Pretty easy to see why this never went to criminal court.

As for this Brian Corbin toolbag, the partner in crime, did he go to prison for robbing the lot? Now that he's testified in open court about doing so, is he going to be going to jail now, as he deserves?



But as for Robert Fox, the notion of civil liability for his future wages is ridiculous. He's a junkie criminal. He wasn't going to be doing any providing for his daughter. Good thing for her, I guess, that Dad was a junkie criminal in a place where junkie criminals are more important than law abiding citizens protecting themselves and their property.


Thank goodness I live under a more civilized jurisdiction.

Originally Posted by michaelr

We have the right to defend our property, this isn't the UK.

Laws vary from state to state. I live in Missouri and have a valid concealed carry permit. I am only allowed to use deadly force to protect my life or the life of a family member. I'm simply not familair with the laws in the state where the incident in the Op happened.

Originally Posted by Hollywood

Laws vary from state to state. I live in Missouri and have a valid concealed carry permit. I am only allowed to use deadly force to protect my life or the life of a family member. I'm simply not familair with the laws in the state where the incident in the Op happened.

Your also allowed to stop a felony in progress, and assume that anyone on your property for reasons of committing a crime is a legitimate threat.

Originally Posted by michaelr

Your also allowed to stop a felony in progress, and assume that anyone on your property for reasons of committing a crime is a legitimate threat.

But are you allowed to use deadly force to do so, or only if you are in fear for your life?