[noparse]http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/man-accidently-shoots-wife-20625880[/noparse]
Link info above delinked intentionally to avoid a linkback.
Also, ABC News is heard making the predictable anti-gun comments. No surprise here.
OK, so 7th Stepper found this story (from Oct. 2013) and it raised some questions for me. I searched, but didn't find it.
People involved:
A) Mom of child
B) Gary, Mom's new boyfriend
C) Tony, father of child
D) Shelley, Tony's (new?) wife
Situation:
Tony and Shelley are dropping off Tony and "A"'s child at "A" and Gary's house. Shelley is recording on her cell phone. Argument ensues over child's schedule between Tony and Gary. Tony throws a punch and Gary draws his gun. Tony runs. Shelley confronts Gary, asking if he's going to shoot them. Argument ensues, with Gary now kicking Shelley. In the course, Gary drops his gun, Tony picks it up, and to quote the story, "accidentally shoots his own wife" (Shelley), who went to the hospital with a collapsed lung.
Analysis, within the framework of Indiana law. Note that this is not the law in Ohio, where this happened, but I want to examine this according to the framework under which we function:
Tony entered Gary's yard (invited), then hit him. Gary was justified in drawing, as he was attacked at his own home. Tony ended the attack when he saw the gun, ceasing hostilities, and running away.
Shelley verbally reproached Gary, who then kicked her, knocking her to the ground.
Tony is heard to say, "Here, I've got the gun now!" and shortly thereafter, a shot is heard.
Of note, Gary was reportedly intoxicated. This point is not a factor in our law, per se, but could be a factor in a recklessness charge.
My conclusions:
While Tony's firing of Gary's gun may have been a result of many factors, at least one factor involved is one of negligence. That Shelley was injured was accidental, as there was no apparent intent to do her harm on Tony's part.
Tony initiated the attack, but ceased his attack, only re-entering conflict to defend his wife. I do not believe his action was anything other than defensive at that point.
Gary was defending himself (from Tony) initially, but then became an attacker when he confronted someone who had not made any attack on him from which he needed to defend himself.
I would expect that Tony would stand trial for battery and Gary would do likewise for charges of criminal recklessness and aggrevated battery (that is, with a weapon; I'm not sure I've identified the correct crime name here)
LEOs, my guess would be that both men would be arrested, while Shelley went to the hospital, and "A" kept the kids. Other views or methods of addressing the situation are eagerly solicited.
Lawyers, have I correctly identified the relevant laws and if you had a choice of defending or prosecuting, which would you choose, and which accused would you prefer to have as either your client to defend or your accused to prosecute?
Others wishing to offer thoughts are also of course welcome to do so, the above views are only the ones in which I am the most interested (mostly because I want to know if I saw all the relevant facts or if I missed something.
)
Blessings,
Bill
Link info above delinked intentionally to avoid a linkback.
Also, ABC News is heard making the predictable anti-gun comments. No surprise here.
OK, so 7th Stepper found this story (from Oct. 2013) and it raised some questions for me. I searched, but didn't find it.
People involved:
A) Mom of child
B) Gary, Mom's new boyfriend
C) Tony, father of child
D) Shelley, Tony's (new?) wife
Situation:
Tony and Shelley are dropping off Tony and "A"'s child at "A" and Gary's house. Shelley is recording on her cell phone. Argument ensues over child's schedule between Tony and Gary. Tony throws a punch and Gary draws his gun. Tony runs. Shelley confronts Gary, asking if he's going to shoot them. Argument ensues, with Gary now kicking Shelley. In the course, Gary drops his gun, Tony picks it up, and to quote the story, "accidentally shoots his own wife" (Shelley), who went to the hospital with a collapsed lung.
Analysis, within the framework of Indiana law. Note that this is not the law in Ohio, where this happened, but I want to examine this according to the framework under which we function:
Tony entered Gary's yard (invited), then hit him. Gary was justified in drawing, as he was attacked at his own home. Tony ended the attack when he saw the gun, ceasing hostilities, and running away.
Shelley verbally reproached Gary, who then kicked her, knocking her to the ground.
Tony is heard to say, "Here, I've got the gun now!" and shortly thereafter, a shot is heard.
Of note, Gary was reportedly intoxicated. This point is not a factor in our law, per se, but could be a factor in a recklessness charge.
My conclusions:
While Tony's firing of Gary's gun may have been a result of many factors, at least one factor involved is one of negligence. That Shelley was injured was accidental, as there was no apparent intent to do her harm on Tony's part.
Tony initiated the attack, but ceased his attack, only re-entering conflict to defend his wife. I do not believe his action was anything other than defensive at that point.
Gary was defending himself (from Tony) initially, but then became an attacker when he confronted someone who had not made any attack on him from which he needed to defend himself.
I would expect that Tony would stand trial for battery and Gary would do likewise for charges of criminal recklessness and aggrevated battery (that is, with a weapon; I'm not sure I've identified the correct crime name here)
LEOs, my guess would be that both men would be arrested, while Shelley went to the hospital, and "A" kept the kids. Other views or methods of addressing the situation are eagerly solicited.
Lawyers, have I correctly identified the relevant laws and if you had a choice of defending or prosecuting, which would you choose, and which accused would you prefer to have as either your client to defend or your accused to prosecute?
Others wishing to offer thoughts are also of course welcome to do so, the above views are only the ones in which I am the most interested (mostly because I want to know if I saw all the relevant facts or if I missed something.
)Blessings,
Bill
