Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Man Aquitted of first degree murder under "make my day" law

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by jsalcedo, Dec 14, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jsalcedo

    jsalcedo Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,683
    Man acquitted of murder under Make My Day law

    A jury Wednesday ruled a shooting death last year was self-defense under the state's Make My Day law, acquitting Gary Lee Hill, who was accused of first-degree murder for killing a man who had assaulted him in his home but was in his car when he was shot.

    The Make My Day law permits people to use deadly force to protect themselves from intruders into their homes.

    Hill, 24, declined comment as he was leaving the courthouse.

    “He’s not guilty. Justice has been done,” said his mother, Kathy Jastrab. “He didn’t deserve to even be here. Those kids beat him and robbed our home. There was no reason for him to even be on trial.”

    The jury deliberated for about six hours, after being handed the case late Tuesday. Fourth Judicial District Judge Robert Lowrey presided over the two-week trial.

    Hill was acquitted on charges of first-degree murder with extreme indifference, and two counts of menacing, in the shooting death of John David Knott, 19. The shooting happened Sept. 5, 2004.

    “He got away with murder,” said Knott’s sister, who would only identify herself as Tina. “He was my only brother. My kids only uncle. This is a sad day.”

    According to testimony, Hill had been having a party that night at the house at 513 Potter Circle. He got into an argument with Allesandra Ash and Amanda Padilla over Padilla’s missing purse. Padilla admitted punching Hill. He brandished a rifle and ordered them to leave.

    The women left, called Padilla’s boyfriend, Knott, and Ash’s boyfriend, Anthony Padilla. They went back to Hill’s house and entered Hill’s basement room, where he was sleeping.

    Padilla testified she hit Hill three more times, and once more with brass knuckles, causing his head to bleed. They fled the house. Hill got a high-powered rifle, loaded it and fired once from the porch into the car Knott was driving. Knott crashed the car into a house and died.

    http://www.gazette.com/display.php?id=1312918
     
  2. antsi

    antsi Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,398
    Based on the info in this article, I'm not sure this is the best case for our cause. Dude shot at a fleeing assailant's car. Chased the assailant outside to shoot at his car. Assailant crashes his car into someone else's house.

    Maybe this isn't the whole story, but based on what's presented here, I say this is questionable judgement at best. The assailant had ceased to be a threat, and the shooter risked hurting innocent nieghbors by pursuing and shooting. I call this a "don't shoot" scenario.
     
  3. 4v50 Gary

    4v50 Gary Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    18,533
    That's the way it ought to be. Attack a man with brass knuckles and think you can get away scot free... I don't think so. A little rehabilitation through reincarnation will give the culprit's soul plently of time to reflect upon the wrongfulness of its way and to come to terms with its errors. In short, seeing Geezus helps! :p
     
  4. Lupinus

    Lupinus Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,502
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    I can understand shooting. For legal/cause reasons it would be a bad idea, from a simply moral standpoint I say hell yeah. Someone breaks into my house and starts hitting on me and then run away if not for the legal crap storm to follow I'd be tempted to shoot them too, hey for all I know they are just running for now and will be back later the next time I fall asleep.

    Are we gonna start bets on how long before that law is erased?
     
  5. Jeff White

    Jeff White Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    19,213
    Location:
    Alma Illinois
    The prosecutor was correct in charging him. Too bad the jury was won over by a good defense attorney.

    I've not read the text of the Colorado law, but I don't think it allows you to defend yourself from intruders while they are retreating. I'm sure the Texas delegation will jump in and point out that he wouldn't have been charged in Texas because you can shoot anyone for any reason at any time there....;)

    Jeff
     
  6. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    One bad influence on the next generation removed.
     
  7. Preacherman

    Preacherman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,309
    Location:
    Louisiana, USA
    Sounds like a classic case of "jury nullification" to me.

    "Yes, he broke the law, but the guy he shot was a scumbag, and we're all better off with him gone, so... NOT GUILTY!"
     
  8. MarshallDodge

    MarshallDodge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    2,287
    Location:
    Utah, USA
    Two wrongs don't make a right but the guy with the brass knuckles was warned. If I were on the jury it would be a tough call but then I don't have all the details.
     
  9. The-Fly

    The-Fly Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    897
    Location:
    Northern Colorado
    what can i say, i love my state :) Though from what little information is availible, i dont think thats a good situation to shoot, but who knows for sure.
     
  10. mbt2001

    mbt2001 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,902
    Location:
    Texas
    There is an old saying in Texas. "F**K with the bull, get the horns." I am tired of criminals running around acting like they don't have anything to fear. They do. Had they done that to a police man, do you think he would have been prosecuted for smoking one of them?
     
  11. Red Dragon

    Red Dragon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    381
    Location:
    Petersburg, Michigan
    who knew there was a "Make my day" law? I wonder how Clint Eastwood feels about that.
     
  12. Tomcat1066

    Tomcat1066 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    232
    Location:
    Southwest GA
    Probably not the best situation to discharge his weapon from a legal standpoint. However, I can't find the energy to feel bad for the dead guy :scrutiny:

    Tom
     
  13. ExtremeDooty

    ExtremeDooty Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    410
    Location:
    Rifle, CO.
    I'm not sure that after getting sucker punched out of a sound sleep, the first thing on my mind would be the legal consequences of my actions over the next few seconds. I don't function that well for several minutes after the alarm clock goes off and all I have to think about is getting a cup of coffee.

    I guess it's a good thing I live in Colorado.
     
  14. ka50

    ka50 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2005
    Messages:
    189
    the guy is obviously a pussy

    a woman hit him once and he pulled an assault rifle? :scrutiny:
     
  15. mbt2001

    mbt2001 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,902
    Location:
    Texas
    What are you talking about? Some chick didn't like the fact that he wasn't providing free beer to her and her Diva friend and called up there boy friends and they beat the dude up.

    Action = Consequence

    Why is it OK to go beat the crap out of someone and then drive on, hit the club, smoke some dope, go to sleep. They had 3 built in Alibis. "No officer were at our place playing cards...."

    Jerky's got what they deserved. It is amazing how few bar fights you get in when you don't visit bars...
     
  16. Jeff White

    Jeff White Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    19,213
    Location:
    Alma Illinois
    mbt2001 asked;

    Yes, I do. In fact I think a police officer would be more likely to be charged in this situation then a non-sworn home owner.

    Jeff
     
  17. antsi

    antsi Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,398
    OK, I'll ammend mine:
    Shootee deserved what he got. No mourning from me.
    I still think the Shooter's judgement was questionable.
     
  18. Steve in PA

    Steve in PA Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,565
    Location:
    NE PA
    Sounds like he got very, very lucky.
     
  19. Sindawe

    Sindawe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,480
    Location:
    Outside The People's Republic of Boulder, CO
    While legally questionable, the jury felt it to be a righteous shooting. A conclusion I concur with. One less thug in our colorful state. :D
    While not beyond the pale, I'd not hold my breath for it to be overturned. Outside of the liberal enclaves of Boulder and Denver, Colorado is rather conservative. Occasionally this is annoying. Most of the time its a boon.
     
  20. NineseveN

    NineseveN member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    2,060
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    :D

    From my understanding, as they left, they said they'd be back...which is what made the jury swing the shooter's way as it is loosely covered under the law. They're on his property, assaulted him twice, once with a deadly weapon, and then as they flee they threaten that they'll be back...

    Not making a judgement either way except I don't feel bad for the dead one that's for sure.
     
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2005
  21. DevLcL

    DevLcL Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    626
    About a year ago there was a drive-by shooting that was directed at the house directly across the street from me. Luckily, none of the bullets came my way. After It was all said and done I was just pissed off that I didn't have time to run out and unload my SKS into the suspected car. I live amongst many houses which are close together so now, looking back, I'm glad I didn't do that. Not only could I have hurt one of my neighbors but we all know what the ********** legal system would have done with me. I would not be nearly as lucky as this guy. Even if nobody died I'd have seperate attmepted murder charges for each person in my neighborhood (not to mention my grandma who lives across the street next to the house that got shot up, the likely direction I'd be shooting).

    But boy did I ever want to give them fellas a piece of my mind.

    -Dev

    Note: Moving to Arizona, let this be reason number 312,667,985.
     
  22. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    Very similar to acquittal the famous .44 Magnum Preacher up in Big Lake last year. I think it was right to bring charges, and also right to acquit. Some people need killing, and it's the job of the jury to make that determination.
     
  23. Czar

    Czar Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2005
    Messages:
    122
    Location:
    Colorado
    At first I agreed then I read the CRS:

    Sounds to me like it's on the hairy edge, but they attacked him with a weapon and he had every reason to believe they "could" commit another crime either against him or someone else. Just because they were retreating didn't mean they had seen the light and would live cleanly the rest of their days, and the way the law is written, an okay to good defense lawyer should have been able to get an aquittal. The prosecutor was in an impossible situation. First of all, he was probably told he had to go after the guy. Second, Colorado Springs probably has more guns per capita than any other medium-large city in Colorado, and to convict this guy you would need 12 people who most likely did not own/hated guns AND believed he was out of bounds regarding the legal grey area. The only places in Colorado where he *may* have been convicted would be City&County of Denver, or Boulder -- and I doubt Boulder.

    I bet there were 2 types of jurors on this case
    1) Those like me who think he acted recklessly, but BARELY inside the letter of the law. (Not guilty because the juror felt no law was broken)
    2) Those who thought the "victims" were asking for it (Not guilty by jury nullification)

    Either way, not guilty, and it only takes 1.
     
  24. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    But the shooting took place as they were leaving, which is way beyond a "no duty to retreat" law.
     
  25. carebear

    carebear Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,373
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    This one falls under the "duty to allow no retreat" clause.

    :evil:

    The man should feel himself lucky there's no double jeopardy and apparent civil immunity.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page