Read more at Legal Insurrection.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

A neighbor saw the teens casing houses and thought about calling the police but didn't want to be thought of as racist.

Congratulations, race baiters and the scheme team who persecuted GZ - YOU caused this kid to get shot. YOU told him he is entitled. YOU said anyone who questions him or his actions is a racist. YOU told him he's not responsible for his behavior; somehow "racists" he'd never met were. YOU caused the neighbor to not intervene, to not call LE to stop this before it started. YOU caused this. And YOU caused many other injuries and deaths and YOU continue to cause them.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

Sundance at CTH describes it.....

Natalie Jackson Almost Kills Another Black Boy – This One 14-years-old In New Orleans….
Posted on July 27, 2013 by sundance
[...]
The neighbor put their common sense in a box, and decided to listen to the embedded narrative from the Natalie Jackson, Sybrina Martin, Ben Jealous, Al Sharpton crowd.

Like a good little white-guiltiest he/she put her common sense in the PC lockbox and decided to shut up.

Result = Another KID Shot


...more at link
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/201 ... w-orleans/

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Well put and exactly right. Those leading race baiters and haters are all about lining their own pockets and settling scores that are literally hundreds of years old, existing these days almost exclusively in their twisted minds. They don't seem to take the next step in their thinking to how much damage they do to those they claim to be helping - or they don't care.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

The good guys were paying attention and apparently are fighting back early, before a narrative takes hold. Good.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

I don't see how there could be *much* of a narrative. The kid scaled an 8-foot fence, and was within feet of the door. There's video of his gate-scaling trespass.

The only "narrative" could come from the kid's accomplice - and surely his testimony could have no credibility.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)

Oh, it's already started, Chip. The poor guy was arrested and charged with attempted 2nd degree murder! He's out on bond now. Make no mistake, there are lawyers in New Orleans who'd love to get an Anderson boot-camp multi-million dollar payout. The same game book was used very successfully in that case, as we saw in the (mostly failed) TM™ case; old photos, etc. It would have or will be tried again in this case, and any similar cases, until it no longer works. Even in the GZ case, the schemers got a payout from the HOA, despite all of the evidence.

I am very sincere in my belief that those who support Landry learned a lot from the GZ case and are taking steps to avoid a similar fate for Landry and their community. Yes, GZ was acquitted, and hopefully (if there is any real justice) he'll be a very, very rich man. However, GZ went through hell for the last 18 months, and there's no end in sight; in many ways GZ's life was taken from him and will likely never be normal again. GZ and his family will be looking over their shoulders for the rest of their lives, and have been ruined financially for at least the time being. None can work, etc.

I haven't done a 5T* run since last week (we went out of town for a few days) but the last time I looked, one idiot was tweeting about running across someone named Zimmerman, and demanding to know if they were related. I don't recall exactly the purpose, what the person intended to do if there was a familial connection, but I'm sure it wasn't pleasant. I mean, I don't think he said he would have killed the person, but he intended to say/do something negative if the Zimmerman he met was related to GZ.

*Traipsing Through The Twitter Toilet


Edit - correct error and clarify

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

This is a difficult situation to take sides at this point. My upbringing, personal morals etc - is that a human life is of far greater value than material stuff.
Had the homeowner been retrieving valuables from his vehicle when confronted by the burglar & fired due to a perceived danger to his life, I'd back him 100% without hesitation.
I struggle to reconcile shooting a person over material things unless it's to prevent a criminal from stealing a firearm which they'd very likely use to victimize society.

I'm hesitant to back the Mr Landry because the thief wasn't attempting to invade the home or otherwise endangering him or his family.
Don't get me wrong, I personally wouldn't hesitate to fire upon a burglar/home invader that's endangering the life of another.

I truly hope Mr Landry didn't shoot the thief for breaking into his vehicle, that'd be a real tragedy.
I'm going to reserve judgement until more is known of the actions of both persons involved.

I agree that more evidence and information needs to be made known before taking too strong of a position; however, every indication is that the kid wasn't going for the car, but rather was attempting a home invasion. (Who scales an 8-foot gate for a vehicular smash-and-grab?) Bear in mind: the car was parked directly in front of the home's back door.

Who knows? Maybe the security camera video shows the kid attempting to break into the car, rather than walking *past* the car, toward the home's back door. Or maybe the video shows him walking past the car, toward the back door.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)

Hi, 70scarrestoguy! Always a good idea to reserve judgment until the facts are in, but based on what is being reported now, I strongly lean toward not guilty. Maybe it's a GZ hangover, and I'll certainly look at all information with an open mind, but scaling a tall fence is pretty strong evidence to me. He wasn't going into a neighbor's yard to get a carelessly thrown ball or something that belonged to him or his buddy. Whether one agrees that shooting someone over material things only is morally right, it's Landry's legal right and I support him. Plus, we'll never know whether the previously charged thief intended to stop at the vehicle or intended to try to get into Landry's house. Like you, though, I do hope more details are forthcoming.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

Dustin Louis Stewart; The accomplice of a home invader armed with a 12" hunting knife that was killed while charging towards the armed homeowner is scheduled to go on trial 8/12/13.
Although Dustin Stewart didn't directly kill the home invader Justin Martin, he was an accomplice to the felony which caused Stewarts death & was charged with Felony Murder-1 as a result.
See: http://www1.odcr.com/detail?court=026-& ... F++1200006

When will I learn to read on before posting? What I should have posted was, "What Chip said."

I'd also like to add that differences of opinion are fine here, so long as everyone is respectful, which is an almost 100% certainty with the quality of the members here.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

70scarrestoguy - yes, as it should be - law breakers should be held accountable for the crimes they commit and/or aid and abet, imo.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

Good afternoon Chip. "however, every indication is that the kid wasn't going for the car, but rather was attempting a home invasion".

I'd read elsewhere that the teen was attempting to break into the homeowners vehicle.
If there's evidence that the teen was attempting to burglarize the home, then I'll back Mr Landry 100% regardless of what he could've done differently.

My qualm is that a human life is far more valuable than materialistic possessions & that I can't support killing a person over things except as previously stated.

Yeah, anyone breaking into a home is inviting an armed response, imo.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

This is all speculation, so: caveat emptor. That said:

The police said that Landry shot the kid from 30 feet away. Landry approached the kid from the "front yard" (I don't totally understand what "front yard" means, looking at the one or two pictures available). The driveway itself appears to be barely 30 feet from the street gate to the back door of the home. I don't know exactly where the kid was when he sustained the gun shot, but it sure seems like he would have had to have been moving past the car and toward the back door of the home. The distances involved would seem to corroborate Landry's statement.

At this point, the primary legal question appears to be: can the state prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Coulter was NOT trying to enter Landry's dwelling, or that Landry did not have reason to believe that Coulter was attempting to enter his dwelling? Regarding the first point: we have been told that Coulter was unarmed. If he was intending something other than a home invasion, what was he doing? Was he attempting to break into the car? How was he going to do that, unarmed? The second point cannot be proven, absent some evidence yet unknown. Coulter had scaled an 8-foot fence at 2:00 in the morning. He wasn't there selling Boy Scout popcorn, or to steal Landry's daughter's Big Wheel from the driveway.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)

Read more at Legal Insurrection.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.