PID ? Man who shot Md. firefighters released, no charges filed

[Lon]

Was the firefighter illegally entering the house, then?

I have no idea about MD law and whether or not they are allowed to do that. Typically our FF's here won't force their way in without us being there.

[SLG]

SLG,

I posted in a hurry a few minutes ago (wife needed something done ASAP) and should have clarified something. Ohio's Castle Doctrine is a rebuttable presumption. So at first glance (and how many prosecutors around here look at it) the law would have presumed the resident in this case was justified in doing what he did. There aren't too many prosecutors around here that I have seen that want or are willing to go to a grand jury and try to rebut that presumption, which they most certainly could try to do in this case. Where I think you would run into problems is in getting a jury of 12 people to convict the guy for a crime. A sympathetic homeowner could totally see where this could have been a spur of the moment reaction based on fear and refuse to convict.

I think there is an absolute civil case waiting to happen in this case, I just don't think there's the mens rea necessary for a conviction in Ohio. Not with our Castle Doctrine law being what it is.

Gotcha. What you said about a jury thinking it was ok for the homeowner to fire in fear is what gets me. As you know, fear is not a valid reason to shoot someone. Too many civilians seem to think it is though, so you are probably right about the jury. A judge's instructions only go so far most of the time.

[voodoo_man]

Very unfortunate incident and I am very deeply saddened by the loss of firefighters who were trying to help someone, or so they thought.

They need to reevaluate their entry procedure and policy so that this type of thing does not occur again.

Locally he would be charged with invol. Manslaughter because he had no PID

[Lon]

In Ohio, if a prosecutor did try to get past the presumption of innocence here's the appropriate charge they would probably look at:

2903.05 Negligent homicide.
(A) No person shall negligently cause the death of another or the unlawful termination of another's pregnancy by means of a deadly weapon or dangerous ordnance as defined in section 2923.11 of the Revised Code.

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of negligent homicide, a misdemeanor of the first degree.

[BehindBlueI's]

I have no idea about MD law and whether or not they are allowed to do that. Typically our FF's here won't force their way in without us being there.

Seems like that'd be a pretty key consideration, given what you posted.

if the victim (read person breaking into your house)had unlawfully and without privilege entered

Anyway, just because he was released today doesn't mean he won't be charged tomorrow.

Example: http://www.indystar.com/story/news/c...-dog/10385853/

The news gets things half right at best, but he was released and then later picked back up and charged with murder. He eventually plead to aggravated battery.

[Lon]

Seems like that'd be a pretty key consideration, given what you posted.

I thought I made it clear I was referring to Ohio law. My apologies if I didn't.

[BobM]

SLG,

I posted in a hurry a few minutes ago (wife needed something done ASAP) and should have clarified something. Ohio's Castle Doctrine is a rebuttable presumption. So at first glance (and how many prosecutors around here look at it) the law would have presumed the resident in this case was justified in doing what he did. There aren't too many prosecutors around here that I have seen that want or are willing to go to a grand jury and try to rebut that presumption, which they most certainly could try to do in this case. Where I think you would run into problems is in getting a jury of 12 people to convict the guy for a crime. A sympathetic homeowner could totally see where this could have been a spur of the moment reaction based on fear and refuse to convict.

I think there is an absolute civil case waiting to happen in this case, I just don't think there's the mens rea necessary for a conviction in Ohio. Not with our Castle Doctrine law being what it is.

That's how I would expect it to go here. (I work in an adjacent county to Lon).

I think the average homeowner, absent relevant training, would hear the sound of forced entry and assume he was the victim of a home invasion.

[Lon]

That's how I would expect it to go here. (I work in an adjacent county to Lon).

I think the average homeowner, absent relevant training, would hear the sound of forced entry and assume he was the victim of a home invasion.

Yep.

Found this in an article about the incident:

A source tells FOX 5's Alexandra Limon that the man woke up to hear someone trying to get into the house, and thought it was intruders-- so he opened fire. The source also says police have no reason not to believe him.

[BehindBlueI's]

I thought I made it clear I was referring to Ohio law. My apologies if I didn't.

No, you were clear. I was just playing along with the hypothetical of if it occurred under the law as you posted, in which case the FF's legal ability to enter the home under the circumstances would be one of the biggest factors in charging decisions.

[HCM]

I'm not familiar enough with MD law to say if charging him is feasible, but I do believe shooting through the door without knowing who is on the other side is reckless and negligent.