Shoot to defend a car?

[JackW]

I think the shooter might be in some trouble over this. He has been released for now, but the prosecutor is still deciding if charges will be filed or not.

This is getting a good amount of time on talk radio in the area and it seems like many people feel it was justified. The people of Cincinnati are finally starting to take their crime problem seriously, if only their city clowncil would join in, it could be a great city once again.

Too bad it will probably end in the shooter probably being jailed and the family of the goblin suing him.

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061024/NEWS01/610240341

8th-grader killed in car theft
Owner could face charges; teen had long record
BY EILEEN KELLEY AND WILLIAM A. WEATHERS | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITERS
KENNEDY HEIGHTS - Quavale Finnell's 15th birthday is Thursday.

He didn't make it.

Instead, his body landed in the Hamilton County morgue after he was shot before dawn Monday by a homeowner as the teen apparently tried to steal the man's car on Odin Avenue.

Police said Quavale was found in the driver's seat of a 1994 Ford Taurus with a gunshot wound in the 3700 block of Odin. He was an eighth-grader at Central Fairmount Elementary School, on the city's West Side.

Police said the bullet hit him in the chest, just under his left arm.

It wasn't clear why Quavale was in Kennedy Heights Monday morning. Some in the neighborhood said they think he lived there, but his mother, who lives on Grove Street in South Fairmount, told police that she expected him home before school.

Police said Bennie D. Hall Jr., 61, the owner of a home on Odin, went outside at 6 a.m. to warm up his car and went back into his house.

When Hall came back outside, he saw someone driving away in the gray Ford Taurus, police said. Hall fired at the fleeing car.

Police said Quavale, who had a juvenile record with 13 cases ranging from jaywalking to breaking and entering, turned around in a dead end and sped away down another street before he crashed into a parked Kia and a fire hydrant.

The car finally came to a halt with its rear wheels on an embankment wall.

News of the shooting shook neighbors.

Rodney Lawson, 41, who lives on Odin, said he heard three shots but did not immediately think the crash and the gunshots were related.

Said Donta Wright, 33, the owner of the Kia: "He was slumped over in the (front seat) of the car."

Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters said his office will decide, probably within 10 days, whether to pursue criminal charges against Hall.

Under Ohio law, the use of deadly force is permitted if a person believes he or she is about to be killed or seriously hurt. People also may use lethal force to defend their homes or businesses.

The amount of force used should be tied to the threat posed by an assailant, Deters said. "If you're in a fist fight, you can't take out a rifle and shoot somebody," he said.

Hall was questioned but later released, police said.

"Do we believe this gentleman is a flight risk? Absolutely not," Sgt. Gary Conner of the homicide unit said. Conner said other officers told him that Hall was upset.

"I think if he ever had to do it again, he wouldn't (have shot)," Conner said. "He was very remorseful, from what I am hearing."

Quavale's fingerprints led police to his mother, Cassandra Finnell, late Monday morning. Police said she collapsed on the floor after the news. Three children, including two infants, draped themselves over her as she cried, Conner said.

 

[Biker]

15 years old in the 8th grade? Ya gotta wonder...

Biker

 

[JackW]

15 years old in the 8th grade? Ya gotta wonder...

That's what makes this a hard call.

Was he a known creep in the area or was he just tempted by an unoccupied running vehicle on the coldest day of the season? Based on his rap sheet, I'm guessing known creep.

Not defending him, just playing Devil's advocate here.

 

[highlander 5]

leaving your keys in your car is a not very smart let alone leaving it running.
Assuming that the perp was known in the neighborhood shooting him is just little over the top.Thank God there were no infants in the car.

 

[Low-Sci]

Eesh. That's ugly all over.

I wouldn't call it a good shoot, but that said I also find it hard to side with a carjacker with a previous record.

I wonder if the kid was shot or died as a result of injuries sustained in the crash. Probably won't matter in court though.

 

[Cousin Mike]

15 years old is too young to die for a joyride. This is just sad.

Would I shoot at someone for stealing my car?

Hell no. Even if it WAS legal in Ohio to defend property (which it isn't), that's what you pay insurance for. I'll get another car. That kid can't get his life back.

You call the police, they find the car, they find the prints, they find the kid. He goes to kiddie-jail - who knows, maybe he turns his life around after that? Even if not, at least you don't have to live with the fact that you killed a kid. I just don't see a justification for shooting someone caught in the act of theft. This was NOT a carjacker, or a carjacking, by any standards.

Trying to take something from you using force is another story. And living in Columbus, which is about 3x bigger than Cincinnatti and has about 10x the violent crime rate, I find it a little hard to choke down "the citizens of Cincinnatti taking their city back," nonsense. Cincinnatti is a VERY quiet city by any standards, aside from a very long history of racial tension.

Shooting teenage thieves isn't helping anything.

 

[Technosavant]

It's not just any car, it's a 94 Taurus.

I don't believe I'd shoot for a good car, no way would lead fly for a Taurus in this situation. Sounds like the little punk was a junior felon and he might well have planned to move up in the world of crime, but this situation didn't merit deadly force.

That guy is in one whole heap o' trouble.

 

[hso]

You shoot to defend your life or the life of another when a deadly threat is directed at yourself or another. You shoot in fear of that deadly threat. You don't shoot in anger or to retrieve property.

If the car owner was standing in the street and the punk had tried to run him over I can justify the shooting, but that wasn't the case. The punk was stealing the car and making his getaway and the owner shot to stop him from leaving with the car.

Having had my car and apartment burgled in the past I can understand his anger and frustration at the theft, but I can't justify the shooting.

 

[BullfrogKen]

This man is in a lot of trouble. That killing is in no way justified.


He's looking at some serious prison time. And, I'd have to agree with sending him there. "Defending" a car? What does a car need defense for? He made a terribly poor judgement call.

 

[RNB65]

Mr. Hall deserves whatever he gets. Using deadly force to stop a non-threatening car theft is unacceptable. Between criminal prosecution and the coming civil lawsuit, his life is going to be most unpleasant from here on.

All for a worthless 12 year old car.

 

[quatin]

Had this been in Texas, it would've been perfectly legal. Kinda makes you think huh? (No I'm not saying anything is wrong with Texas...or Ohio)

 

[The-Fly]

legally justified? Probably not.

morally justified? In my opinion, a big YES. Stealing someone's mode of transportation is messed up. They used to hang horse thieves. I think they should hang car thieves as well.

 

[Helstrm]

Well it is Clear in SC that you may not use deadly force to protect personal Property. Unless he was using the car to run over him I think he will be doing time.

I think it was a bad call to shoot in this case. Yes the kid was wrong for stealing the car but in this case the punishment was way too harsh IMO.

I protect my life and the life of my family with a firearm, I protect my car with Insurance.

 

[kymarkh]

not justified

I do not believe this shooting was justified in any way, but I do not know the whole story. Common sense dictates that one does not leave the car running unattended very early on a cold winter morning, but I'm sure lots of folks do the same when living in 'quiet cities' or rural areas. I'm torn on this one as I live in the general area and never want to see a young person lose their life over a piece of property, whether it be a new pair of Nikes or a car that is 'no good'. No posessoin is worth dying over, period. And the only kid in this car was not in a child safety seat.

Then again I don't really want to believe that I live in a society where I can work hard my whole life, get up early one monday morning to go to work only to watch some punk who should be getting ready for school drive away in my second most valuable posession (besides my home) and not be able to do a thing about it except reach for my cell phone. I'm sure this man will wish he had done just that for the rest of his life.

 

[txstyletj06]

"Not a Car jacking?" are you kidding me? the kid stole the car, 15 years old or not, he stole it. he may not have drawn a weapon and forced the owner to turn over the car, but he did steal it! yes, it's not the smartest thing in the world to leave your car running unattended, but it still gives you NO LEAGL RIGHT to take someone elses property! whether or not the killing is justified has no bearing on what the kid did, he stole a car, someone else's property and he paid the price. unfortunately in his situation he paid with his life, but he chose to break the law and by stealing that car he excepted the possible consequences for his action and to his dismay he underestimated the situation and chose the wrong car to steal that morning. maybe the kid was a product of his environment (bad parenting, siblings, community) whatever, but he had a previous record that was apparently pretty lengthy and at 15 years old he was headed no where fast. i feel bad for his family and having to deal with the loss of their child and i feel bad for the guy who took his life and will now have to live with that burden for the rest of his, but i in no way feel bad for the kid. at 15 you know right from wrong and if you decide to constantly follow the wrong path then you need to be reponsible for your actions and what will follow accordingly. according to the media the owner was well within his legal rights to fire on him, so i think his remorse alone is enough punishment. hopefully his mother will do a better job of raising her other children from now on.

 

[Henry Bowman]

The kid had a long record of auto theft. Still, from all I've seen, it looks like a bad shoot.

Too bad for all involved. Relatives of the kid (thief) acknowledged on TV that they had been telling him that he was going to wind up in jail or dead.

according to the media the owner was well within his legal rights to fire on him,

Not in anything I've seen or read. The local media has been surprisingly neutral on this. It is an unfortunate truth about Cincinnati and I hate to say it, but if the shooter had been white...

 

[Cousin Mike]

"Not a Car jacking?" are you kidding me?

No, I am not kidding. Car jacking is taking someone out of their vehicle by means of force to steal it, usually at gunpoint. Auto theft is just that... theft. There's a BIG difference. One is a deadly force situation, that being a carjacking. One is NOT - that being the theft- legally (in Ohio) or morally (IMO). I shouldn't have to explain this.

but it still gives you NO LEAGL RIGHT to take someone elses property!

No one, including myself, defended the kid or the act of stealing cars. I believe the sentiment here is that a death sentence is a little harsh.

at 15 you know right from wrong and if you decide to constantly follow the wrong path then you need to be reponsible for your actions and what will follow accordingly.

So you never did ANYTHING illegal, wrong, stupid, foolish, dangerous, etc. as a teenager or young adult? I'm not saying that this kid wasn't on the wrong path - I think that's apparent. But I have yet to wake up and discover that Jesus is my son, so I'll reserve my judgement of others until then.

whether or not the killing is justified has no bearing on what the kid did

I suppose, but it is the topic of this thread.

hopefully his mother will do a better job of raising her other children from now on.

Now that is just mean. Regardless of how you feel about it, I think it's sad that an adult would say something like that.

 

[dasmi]

Nope, not me. That's why I pay for insurance. Unless I'm fear of my life, the kid could go ahead and have my car. It's replaceable.

 

[Joe Demko]

Had this been in Texas, it would've been perfectly legal. Kinda makes you think huh?

Expand on this, please. In what way do you find the difference between the Texas and Ohio laws thought provoking?

 

[Helstrm]

but it still gives you NO LEAGL RIGHT to take someone elses property!

The point is that taking someone's property does not give you the legal right to shoot them. Unless you can look a Judge in the eyes and say "I felt that my life was in danger" or at least be able to claim self defense on the behalf of someone it is not a clean shoot.

These are not the kind of hot heads that need to be armed in the first place. Bad call and he will more than likely spend a lot of years in jail for it.

 

[El Tejon]

Wait and see. I have no confidence in the media's reporting.

Regarding Texas law, may want to look at the statute again. I think a '94 Ford may be easy to replace, with a bicycle for example.

 

[eastwood44mag]

Agree with The-Fly.

We've gotten so PC in this day and age, that the victims are criminals.

South Africa has such a problem with carjacking, that they have flamethrowers under the doors, to cut off the thug at the knees. I would like to see those here.

So long as criminals feel safe, the problem will not be solved.

 

[Sindawe]

Legally, the shooter is in for a world of hurt. As I understand it, the law in most states does NOT permit the use of lethal force to defend property.

Pity that....

As for the now room temperature car thief. I'll shed no tears for the sorry waste of food and air.

 

[Heavy Metal Hero]

Now that is just mean. Regardless of how you feel about it, I think it's sad that an adult would say something like that.
Today 12:02 PM

Well I disagree. Many urban minority parents have too many children and live on food stamps and other means of survival because they are too lazy to work. This has detrimental (Spelling?) effects on the children and how they act. Hell most parents don't even care about their children unless something bad happens to them. This kid has a criminal record which includes breaking and entering. Sorry but this kid is going to turn out violent.

Think about this...

Say he did get away with the car, what is to say the 15 year old deliquent hit and killed a mother and her children, or any other innocent person for that matter. Typical lack of inner city parenting. I am sorry, but I only buy the "Poor, uneducated minority" excuse for so long.

 

[Handgun Midas]

I saw this on the afternoon news yesterday.
With our current laws and popular emotions, this was a bad shoot all around.

Shooter was not in danger. The car crash caused other damage. The dead thief was a minor.
That's an easy case for the prosecution and more bad-will for local CCW supporters like myself.

Common sense, however, should point out that the shooter couldn't know how old the thief was;
and if this kid wanted to play the big-boy games, he got what he deserved.