That would be my interpretation.
That would be my interpretation.
In SC we have Castle Doctrine; forcible entry to commit felony--kill him. I would appreciate replies that address the fact that the perp does not have a firearm and is leaving the house and you shot him in the back--therein lies the real question, IMO. How do you justify deadly force now that the forcibly entry is a thing of the past.
If you are talking about he has already committed the act and is on the way out, away from me, no, I would not shoot.
From what I understand of the Castle Doctrine in SC, it wouldn't be a good shoot if he was already leaving. Maybe if you could use the gun to order him to stop, etc. and wait for LEO's to arrive. But, the shoot, as he's walking away... that would be a bad shoot, I believe. If he's still facing you, or as he's on the way In.
I disagree with your first reply phreddy and do agree with RevolvingMag. I agree with the second part of your reply ph, which agrees somewhat with Mag. At night, you can effect a citizen's arrest and if he keeps going out your door you can shoot him in the back--BUT ONLY AT NIGHT In daytime, there has to be a presumption of imminent danger tied to the criminal act and when he is going out the door, even though it is with your money--it is a touchy decision--prosecutor may not follow thru but civil acts will follow. C'mon ph, where is the imminent danger or presumption of same as he runs away from your house--say what you want but you will look silly before a judge and jury explaining that scenario. Don't get me wrong---I would like nothing better than to pulverize the guy with my shotgun right between his shoulder blades---now if he were to turn around--yada yada yada.
I agree with Bark'n on this one. Besides the man is a fleeing felon. He is not out the door and still a threat. Read Massad's recent article on the subject.
The minute he laid his hands on "my old lady", he put me in "Fear for My life"...
The fact he was leaving?
My wife will swear in court that we both heard him say "I'm going out to my car, to get my gun, and come back and kill you BOTH!"
Hence the reason I shot him 5 times in the back and twice in the melon!
Ya'll can lawyer it out all you want - but I'd be willing to spend the rest of my life in prison if ANYONE laid a finger on my Wife or kid! NO REGRETS!
Well the thread has kind of split. First yes by all means he kicks in the door, castle doctrine, disparity of force and so on justified in shooting no disagreement there.
Again depending on your state laws, you would have to do some mighty fancy talking to justify shooting him after he has exited and is no longer posing a threat. Yes there are places where the law can dictate your right to shoot a fleeing felon, but you better have your ducks in a row before doing it. With that being said 85-90 years old yeah he could probably get away with the criminal portion the civil portion would/could eat his or anyone elses's lunch. Remember the he coulda, woulda, he might have done, will probably not cut it.
Also, my CPL instructor pointed out that if your olding onto one end of a peice of property ahd he has the other, an attempt to get you to let go is an assault on you not just an attempt to grab your property. I guess I would prevent him from exiting with my property.
I wouldn't shoot him once he's out on the front porch making a bee line towards the road, but as long as he's still inside the house he's fair game.
Now in Missouri, Castle Doctrine extends to the end of your property, but after he's exited the house, I would consider the threat over at that point and not shoot him. But inside the house, at age 90, yeah, shoot him.
You can't say the forcible felony is over with as soon as he finished kicking down the door. You don't simply separate the events. He broke in, he's ransacking the house, he's stealing $40,000 I'm gonna shoot him before he gets out the door.