To stop a burglar

He apparently sliced open the burglars torso and almost severed off his hand.  The burglar died at the scene.  Home security FTW!

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...AR2009091503930.html

Wow.

Where did it say he sliced his torso open?

I heard it on the morning radio on my drive to work (1010 Wins).

I have a feeling there is more to this story than what has been reported.  Keep your eyes open and let's see what comes out as time goes by. I am betting this guy does time.

T

I'm not so sure, unless details come out that lead to the student's side of the story being made up.

I read that the burgler just got out of the clink the weekend prior and the student's house was burglerized shortly after. Its likley this guy was involved and came back for more stuff. I doubt the guy is going to do any serious time, I'd say a slap on the wrist. A recent history of being victomized, an intruder in your basement, and the guy (supposedly) lunges at you.

This is no different than if you had a butcher knife and defended yourself. You also have the right to kill if you fell you are in imminent danger, even with the use of a gun (though it better be a registered one!). Unless the defense part is bogus, he'll walk with a handshake from the cops off camera and get some time of slap from the judge if they do anything at all. From the article I saw, the cops arrived while there was a commotion, calls for help. The sword attack was while the cops were onsight and outside. Again, early reports can be bogus, but if that is true, I doubt we'll see the student up on any serious charges.

The only reason we are reading about this story at all is because of the glamorous nature of the response, a 3 foot samurai sword. If it were a kitchen knife, no press lol.

Multiple wounds vs 1 or 2 wounds.  That's what the ME has to see and that is what will make the case.  If the burglar died from A wound, struck to the head, chest, or other major organ and died... then it can be played out as self defense.  If the burglar was stabbed repeatedly and very little defensive wounds... then the college kid is going to get tried for murder.

The threat of life is what makes the logic here.  If the college kid caught the thief, the thief lunged, and the kid fell back with sword pointing straight out and burglar impaled himself on sword (a la "300" scene with the wolf and spear), then self defense.  If the college kid hit the thief, thief went down hurt, and then college kid deliver a coup de grace... it's murder 2 for the kid.

I don't care if the perp had multiple wounds.  It is established law that if one's home is invaded and one is threatened, one can defend with deadly force.  Someone advancing on me is a threat.  Much better that the wounds are from the front, however.  If such is the case, as was initially reported, thee is no way 12 jurors will convict him of anythng assuming that an indictment can be obtained.

Of course, as Noah will tell you, any prosector worth a damn can indict a ham sandwich.

It is established law that if one's home is invaded and one is threatened, one can defend with deadly force.

That's the point.  If the thief was no longer a threat and the kid kept hitting/stabbing/slicing him... then no more self defense protection.  I am not saying right or wrong.  Just saying if the coroner finds it like that, then the kid will get charged.

No offense, but the college kid will NOT be tried for murder, lol. Murder is a premeditated act with intent to kill. Even if he overacted, he will not be charged for murder, but more likley a low grade manslaughter charge at best (and only if it is found that he struck to kill a retreating intruder, and didn't defend against one that was lunghing at him to do harm). That charge at most could carry a sentence of 10-15 years, out in 4 on good behaviour. Manslaughter is considered killing on impulse, like you shot someone during a road rage incident, or killed someone with a knife in a bar fight. You didn't intend to take a life, but once a situation occured, you overacted and caused a mortal wound. On the other hand, if you hunted that person, planned the attack and it resulted in death, and evidence was presented that you planned not only the confrontation, but also the outcome, that is indeed murder.

I know from what I speak above and will not say more why (but no I didn't kill anyone lol).

Killing someone who breaks into your home is never murder. You can't plan someone burgling your place of residence :)

You can't plan someone burgling your place of residence :)

Not true.  I'll leave it at that 

Manslaughter is considered killing on impulse, like you shot someone during a road rage incident, or killed someone with a knife in a bar fight. You didn't intend to take a life, but once a situation occured, you overacted and caused a mortal wound.

Right.  Under the Common Law, or law made by courts, murder was the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. The term malice aforethought did not necessarily mean that the killer planned or premeditated on the killing, or that he or she felt malice toward the victim. Generally, malice aforethought referred to a level of intent or reck-lessness that separated murder from other killings and warranted stiffer punishment.

Remember, everything I said was IF the coroner finds that the burglar received a mortal wound after signs indicated the burglar was no longer a threat.  Then it's murder.

Great point in this is with the IG trial we had for Father Edwin.  He was convicted of Murder.  It because he caused a mortal wound after the vicitms were "no longer considered a viable threat" to anyone at the time of the incident.

There's been a few incidents in the news regarding either people defending their homes, or nutjobs carrying them while being nutty in public.  Because it makes a good headline (even better than with just a normal sword), they draw attention.  I googled up some other articles about it to get more information, and one journalist was framing it as the kid was using the sword to "hack to bits" the burglar, without any supporting evidence.  It's what makes good news gossip.

Sounds like Fox news to me.

You can't plan someone burgling your place of residence :)

Not true.  I'll leave it at that   

Yeah, I stand corrected. I meant to say as an innocent, and not some rare incident reminicent of a CSI or Law and Order episode, if someone invades your home, without your knowledge, by virtue of that a premeditated act is eliminated. Obviously if we're going to bring up a scenario like a badly written crime drama would broadcast, it would involve prior knowledge and that is a different story :)

I once knew a guy who use to be a patrol officer in Brooklyn, and was attacked on Ocean Avenue by a crazy Russian guy with a sharpened broad sword.  The officer won (without firing his sidearm).

Well, just because you HAVE one doesn't mean you're competent with it.  Heck, you're likely to be just as dangerous to yourself with it...

Sounds like Fox news to me.

Perhaps, but MSNBC would wonder why the man with the sword was such a racist.