A Marine needs your help!

In the statement issued Friday, the Governor's Office says, "Governor Richardson is prepared to consider executive clemency for Elton John Richard."

Click to expand...

If the govenor's office said this, there is a high chance it is happening. Generally they don't make a big statement like this then back track and look foolish.

Overall, it wasn't legal to chase down an intruder like that. However, I believe one should factor in that he may have reacted in a combat mentality rather than how the average suburban Dad reacts. In Iraq, you don't sit around and call 911, etc, you neutralize threats. It sounds like his combat instict took over that night, which is why I think the govenor should consider clemency.

I hope everything works out for your friend, i really do, i know what its like to have one of yours in a hard place like that.

how ever.......

"It sounds like his combat instict took over that night, which is why I think the govenor should consider clemency." Thats a crock of male bulvine fecal matter IMHO.

The laws have to apply to all of us, or none of us, foolish as some of them may be. It was in the confines of the law and was with in reason of what a normal person would have done or it isnt.

Let me get this straight... He chased down an unarmed fleeing burglar and killed him, and this is "self defense" because he is a Marine???

I thought Marines held themselves to a higher standard than others - I can't imagine using a "Marine defense" to escape prosecution for a crime! If this is what he considers acceptable, I don't want to be on the street with him.

Sorry, but a crime is a crime for everyone. Marines can't execute burglars.

Harpo

I personally consider this a good shooting but the law is different and it should be applied to him as it would anyone of us.

While I certainly don't think the Marine did the earth a disservice by killing a scumbag, I don't see how this is legally defensible.

He chased down the guy and shot him in the upper chest near a fence. There is nothing wrong with chasing a guy who stole your property or even tried to. The fact that the BG was being chased which would put the former Marine to his rear but was shot in the chest which is the front and near a fence might change a few things. The BG had a sledge and screw driver, did he drop one or both? I doubt he tried to run with a sledge but BGs are not the brightest bulbs in the house. THe BG was shot in the chest near a fence. Is it possible that the BG came to the fence, turned and challenged or threatened the Marine? Did he still have his screw driver? The guy was shot in the chest so he was no longer fleeing. Wish we had all the facts.


Len

Doesn't really matter if the BG turned to face the Marine during the pursuit. If he did, and the BG prevailed, HE could claim self defense. But the Marine could not - he appears to be the one who escalated the situation.

Shooting an intruder?: Justificable
Chasing him as he is fleeing and then shooting him?: Not justificable at all. Not at all, and as a matter of fact, illegal.

If I encountered a home invader, I would only shoot if he presents an imminent threat to me or someone else in the house. If he turns and runs, well, thats what my whole point is, and I achieved my point.
NO WAY IN HELL you go chasing after them, not to mention a quarter of a mile, and then shoot them and claim self defense.

There's several different stories being mentioned about what actually happended. The judge in the case actually said he wanted to give Richard a lesser sentence but Richard showed no remorse and has insisted he did the right thing.
The Governor has asked the judge to reconsider his decision and is considering clemency but the family must request clemency before the Gov can authorize it. Apparently the family has not yet asked.

I'm glad there's one less scumbag around but I think Richard might be lucky to only get two years because the shooting took place so far away from his house.

He's lucky to have gotten the light sentence that he did, especially without showing any remorse. He's also given the rest of us a bad name. He crossed the line from defense to revenge, giving the antis another example of why firearms should be restricted (especially in the case of servicemen returning from combat zones).

pablo45 said:

I do understand however the big thing alot of people are not seeing is that this guy was a federal agent at the time of the shooting.

Click to expand...

What agency and in what capacity? Furthermore, if this is true, then why hasn't said agency stepped forward to aid in his defense?

So just because he served, he should receive special treatment, since if any of us did that, we'd likely be facing a lot worse than 2 years?

I really can't feel much sympathy on this one. Everyone is equal in the eyes of the law. No exceptions.

Marine

The perpetrator brought it on himself. If he had not broken into the Marine's home he would still alive. It was 100% his fault. FREE THE MARINE. He has done nothing that 90%of us would not have done in the same situation. This was a civic betterment killing.

The perpetrator brought it on himself. If he had not broken into the Marine's home he would still alive. It was 100% his fault. FREE THE MARINE. He has done nothing that 90%of us would not have done in the same situation. This was a civic betterment killing.

Click to expand...

I hope you're joking. That's not high road at all.

Speak for yourself on the "90%" idea.

Was it LEGAL no... Was it RIGHT??? Yes.

"The laws have to apply to all of us, or none of us, foolish as some of them may be. It was in the confines of the law and was with in reason of what a normal person would have done or it isnt."
Now that is a flawed logic.
It would only make sense if you knew that the people MAKING the laws were indeed "Normal People". Is there even such a thing??

The people MAKING the laws are people of the victim mentality. They wouldn't understand what motivates a person to fight for what is theirs. The only fighting that those people know is legal fighting.... and THAT means that you have to become a victim first.

The LAW has no room for people that would rather fight for their beliefs than become victims and then legally fight for recompense. whether that fighting be to defend their self, loved ones, property or pride.

I'm in TOTAL agreement!!!

Marine

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The perpetrator brought it on himself. If he had not broken into the Marine's home he would still alive. It was 100% his fault. FREE THE MARINE. He has done nothing that 90%of us would not have done in the same situation. This was a civic betterment killin

In what sense was it "right"?

I won't lose any sleep over this guy's abrupt end either, but killing someone who was supposedly fleeing, who didn't attempt to harm the man or his family, isn't the "right" thing to do, at least according to my moral compass.

A Little More Info

I've been following this case for awhile. Here's some further data for debate.
Richard followed the two-time convicted felon from his house to restrain him while asking his neighbor to call 911. After a fist-fight, the deceased threatened to call his buddies, at the same time approaching Richard with "something" in his hands. Then, and only then did Richard discharge his weapon (single shot COM). Because of the lack of sufficient remorse, the judge not only ordered 2 years jail, but also $30,000.00 reparations to the family of the burgler who had traces of Cocaine and Alcohol in his blood. Is this justice? I don't think so. My faith in the judicial system is severly compromised.

As federal propperty, Under contract to the US Gov as a Marine, acting in that capacity is a federal agent. He was trained and paid by the government. No different than the CIA, FBI or HS.

This is a grave injustice!

BG was a two-time felon: Not an issue, and doubtful the Marine knew this.

Chasing then confronting fleeing BG: Totally separate incident from the attempted burglary.

Marine was in no immediate danger, but chose to put himself in danger by confronting BG. He could have called the cops, but rather he decided to have someone else do that, while he went vigilante. Very bad move.

Sorry, he screwed up. He was so worried about his family, but he left them and took off after this guy??? he should have stayed with his family.

The Marine caused any "threat" by chasing down the guy and getting into a fight with him.

Richard followed the two-time convicted felon from his house to restrain him while asking his neighbor to call 911. After a fist-fight, the deceased threatened to call his buddies, at the same time approaching Richard with "something" in his hands. Then, and only then did Richard discharge his weapon (single shot COM). Because of the lack of sufficient remorse, the judge not only ordered 2 years jail, but also $30,000.00 reparations to the family of the burgler who had traces of Cocaine and Alcohol in his blood.

Click to expand...

if thats true him going to jail and having to pay the family is severely unjust. either way though, chasing the BG down might not have been the best choice in the first place. hard to know what really happened and i dont want to draw any conclusions without knowing all the facts.

i hope the governor makes a decision accordingly.

pablo45 said:

KEEP IN MIND HE WAS A FEDERAL AGENT FOR D.O.E. AT THE TIME OF THE SHOOTING, PLUS HERE IN NM EVEN PRIVATE CITIZENS CAN DETAIN CRIMINALS GRANTED HE HAD A BADGE AND A GUN.

Click to expand...

Department of Education? Department of Energy? If he had "a badge and a gun" issued by his agency then why hasn't said agency stepped up to defend him?

I'm okay with him chasing him down.
I'm not okay with him shooting an unarmed man like that.
Since each case is different, each case needs review.
A prison sentence is not what he needs.
In this case it sounds like some basic counseling, and mental health review is all that he needs.
Throw in a hundred hours of community service and it should all be good.
That's just how i see it, we should all be treated Equally and FAIRLY by the courts.