Log into Facebook | Facebook

Castle Doctrine in Tennessee. Other states it would be trespassing. Coming to the property then not leaving when told made it trespass. Forcing himself on the rifleman (who got and was carrying the rifle on his property) was assault. Was shooting him required - The court will decide. Not murder, manslaughter, but under provocation most likely since he grabbed for the rifle.
I'm not a legal guy but cops should have been called the moment he showed up there. If he was supposed to pick the son up at another location, then maybe not even manslaughter. It also depends on the boys age. Different states have different age requirements for making a child go with a parent they do not wish to care for them.

It's behind an access wall.

It's a tough one for me. Shooter definitely escalated the situation. But, so did the dead guy. And the dead guy reached for the weapon and threatened the shooter.

I think it is a lesser charge like manslaughter, but I am not a legal expert - and it will depend on what the legal codes for wherever this happened are.

We saw the prosecutor in the Rittenhouse argue that the person creating the threat can't claim defense - which is true. (It wasn't APPLICABLE to the Rittenhosue trial, but it was a true statement.) Here we see the shooter definitely creating a threat. So I think his self-defense claim is out.

Unless, of course, he is in a castle doctrine and/or stand your ground state, in which case he may have a claim of protecting his property. He *had* repeatedly asked the man to leave, escalating the forcefulness of his demands.

I think a lot will depend on where this happened.


Regardless of the legal outcome, BOTH men were dead wrong. One of them literally.


For questions like this, my go-to guy is Capt Prickett, but RP isn't letting me tag him right now.