Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Man was acting in self-defense when he killed sheriff's deputy.

LOOK OUT!!

IT'S A SCARY LITTLE KID. RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!

good

Back in 1979 a MN man was convicted for shooting a cop who entered his home announced.

In 1982 the conviction was overturned.

we are drawn to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove beyond every reasonable doubt that defendant Housley was not acting in his own self-defense when he shot at Sergeant Mack. Accordingly, we reverse.

http://www.leagle.com/decision/19821068322NW2d746_11006


So, according to this "Self Defense" may indeed justify the shooting of an LEO in a No-Knock Raid.

Good to Know!

Apples and Oranges............the case listed above is different.

I clicked on the link above and did some reading about that case. There was this quote which makes it a completely different comparison to the OP(Original Post) case.



There has been quite a bit of interest and discussion(25 pages/242 responses/65K+ views) about this case. From the second link of the two links provided in the OP it appears that the shooter was a convicted felon who "legally" had no right(s) to be in any proximity of firearms.



How a "high profile criminal defense attorney" can say something like that and still think there is a defendable case is very baffling.

I don't believe that the defense attorney was being quoted there. The comments about the felony and misdemeanor drug conviction were separated by dashes which would indicate to me the information was added by the author of the article. It may or may not be true, who knows.

It doesn't matter whether or not there is a defendable case. The defense attorney is going to be paid to do it anyway and everything he says or does is going to be geared toward getting his guy acquitted.

A criminal Record does not take away a citizens right to self defense.

So, far there have been no comments by his attorney or the Sheriff's Dept, that he had a felony conviction. Only the words of a reporter.

And from Gitem 12

"I would surmise the KN requirements were met because they had grounds to believe the suspect ( who was a convicted felon) was armed and had more to do with element of surpise in regards to safety. And had damn little to do with the number of Pot plants"

personally ,I feel that they should announce just to avoid such a tragic situation ,that being said the suspect is FAR from a choir boy and should be dealt with ,like someone said surround the place ,announce as the front door comes down maybe 1 second before but announce just so the scum bag can't say he didn't know who was there ,neutralize as necessary

...And he got that from the News article, from the reporter, NOT from the LEO or Magee's attorney.

We don't know that he was a scum bag. With all the felony criminal laws on the books today anyone of us on here is a potential scum bag.

...and if you are from CT and you did not get your "assault" rifle and your mags Registered by Jan 2014, you are now a Scum Bag and subject to the same treatment by LEO.

If you guys define "scum Bag" as some one you has broken the law and endangered the public in any way, who is the bigger scum bag here?

The trailer trash that grew a few pot plant for personal use, or the LEO that acquired a No-Knock Warrant under false pretense and violated the United States Constitution?

Which is the Bigger Crime here? A few plants or the Constitution? If you want to call those involved "Scum Bags", go for it, just be sure to include all the scum.

He lived n a trailer house........ that makes him scum to a lot of the guys here.

He came to the attention of a cop. THAT makes him a scumbag.

From the deputy's picture, the donut shop is gonna take a big financial hit. That's what scumbags like this piece of trailer trash do to hurt their community.

No way around it.......... hang him at sunup.

What you don't understand is that, absent due process, cops breaking down a door with guns drawn are undistinguished in our legal tradition from a gang of any other sort of brigands. Due process isn't achieved till the suspect has been granted a reasonable opportunity to inspect and understand the warrant document. Until then, all people attempting to force entry, badges or no, are no better than brigands in the eyes of the law, and may (ought to be) treated as such in a free society in which the rule of law still applies.

So the LEO lawbreakers are no better that the trailer trash scum like Magee.

Worse, since Magee is a mere suspect, presumed innocent before the law, while the cops are behaving like Viking raiders, having failed to render due process according to original intent.

Agreed!

I couldn't agree more and said much better than I would have said it.

Nah...I mean as individuals. Used to be, the only things I was scared of were lightning and women. Now it's just lightning. But hey...if it makes you happy...

Give the Cops a break..they were running low on weed.