And relatives of dead-people also don't like self-defense. 15-year-old accused of shooting mother's boyfriend in Eastpointe; self-defense suspected
"We do believe some element of self-defense was involved," [Detective Brian] Showers said.
Both the boy and his mother were taken into custody. The woman was released without charges after an interview. Her son was released after a hearing Friday, pending further investigation.
If they believed it was a case of self-defense, why did they hold him for a hearing? Maybe that is an issue with Michigan law. Maybe it is because a 15-year-old can't own a handgun. (The gun belonged to his mother.) Maybe they just hate self-defense.
The guy who got shot was no angel.
"Officers have been dispatched to the house multiple times. We have five criminal investigation reports on file for domestic assault, harassment, and family troubles at that residence," Showers said.
Showers said all of those calls involved Neely.
The guy fathered 10 children. The mother of two of those kids is upset, because he was invited to the house, before he attacked the woman living there. (Self-defense involves an attack of some kind.) That invitation, she says, means that you give up your right to defend yourself, or your family. According to the relative of the dead person.
In any event, the police and the courts seem to be lurching in the right direction, if this proves to be self-defense. Which is a human-right. And it has often been recognized as a legal right in Michigan.
As a Michigan resident, Michigan has strong protections for self defense. There is no duty to retreat and legitimate self defensive shootings are protected from lawsuit. That does not mean that law enforcement approves and doesn't try to twist things. Given the location, I suspect the shooter was a minority and may have been targeted for that reason.
ReplyDeleteAs an example, several years ago an passing acquaintance had a gun pulled on him by a person who walked up to his truck. He shot the assailant. The police questioned him for a bit and gave him back his gun and let him go home.
My take was that the cops saw a black kid, and immediately decided that he was guilty. But I don't like to assume that all cops are racist, because as much as don't trust cops in every situation, I do trust that "professional journalists" will get something wrong.
DeleteJustin O Guy - due to trying to do 4 things at once and not paying attention I accidentally deleted your comment. And because of the way Google has designed this system, there is no undo. So I include it here. I'm sorry...
ReplyDelete"So, the premise is, if I invite someone to my house I'm supposed to just accept whatever they choose to do, because I'm the host and he's the guest, right up to and including calmly accepting him assaulting me? And If someone is willing to assault me, am I supposed to just believe all they want to do is split a lip? Black an eye? What if he knocks me out and stomps me to death?
No, I'm gonna take that kid out for a meal, a movie, maybe an ice cream.
And that would be Me, if I was a cop who responded. The kid saved his mom. And will wake up many nights, because he had to kill someone. Hopefully,, hopefully he is that kind of a guy. Even killing someone who needs killed should hurt in the deepest parts of our guts,I Think. I've never, hope to never, but maybe when you do something like that, it doesn't hurt inside. It's a good thing he knew where the gun was."
Skin color was my assumption, unfortunately experience has led to me having a near complete distrust of all authority figures including the media.
ReplyDelete