16 year old shot and killed in Noblesville

[Yup!]

To point a gun at someone--a devastatingly dangerous and insane action in itself--AND pull the trigger is clearly first degree murder in my book. He would have to successfully argue that he didn't mean to pull the trigger for me to think otherwise, and it sounds like there were witnesses who saw him point it at her and pull the trigger. Why, why why, would he pull the trigger of a deadly weapon while pointing it at someone if he did not intend to harm them?

I disagree.

if in his mind he unloaded the firearm (by removing the magazine) he demonstrated he did not intend to shoot her.

He still very guilty of stupidity, pointing a firearm, and reckless homicide, but first degree murder this is not.

 

[MCgrease08]

Curious about you opinion on what charges should be filed in this case?

I'm no lawyer, but what they've charged him with seems about right. It was certainly reckless. I would have to disagree with netsecurity on first degree murder. It doesn't sound like there was any type of premeditation involved. Beyond that, I'm not really sure.

 

[netsecurity]

I disagree.

if in his mind he unloaded the firearm (by removing the magazine) he demonstrated he did not intend to shoot her.

He still very guilty of stupidity, pointing a firearm, and reckless homicide, but first degree murder this is not.

Stupidity/ignorance doesn't excuse anyone from not knowing how something works or the law. Most people know that guns fire without magazines in them, and some guns (m&p) even have these words engraved on the slide. Aiming a gun at someone is a very serious matter, and only a very young child could be excused of such ignorance. Certainly a 20yo knows better. So there was malice. Then to actually pull the trigger demonstrates anger. So yea, not first degree but second degree murder should be charged IMO. Regardless of his ignorance, this was likely an act of aggression and dominance. That is my point. He made it personal by aiming at her, and sealed the deal by pulling the trigger. This was no child playing cowboys and indians.

 

[Yup!]

Stupidity/ignorance doesn't excuse anyone from not knowing how something works or the law. Most people know that guns fire without magazines in them, and some guns (m&p) even have these words engraved on the slide. Aiming a gun at someone is a very serious matter, and only a very young child could be excused of such ignorance. Certainly a 20yo knows better. So there was malice. Then to actually pull the trigger demonstrates anger. So yea, not first degree but second degree murder should be charged IMO. Regardless of his ignorance, this was likely an act of aggression and dominance. That is my point. He made it personal by aiming at her, and sealed the deal by pulling the trigger. This was no child playing cowboys and indians.

but did he mean to kill her?

 

[Trigger Time]

It certainly doesn't meet the definition of murder. If it did does anyone really think the prosecutor wouldn't go for it?! I rarely hear of any prosecutor undercharging someone unless they're a celebrity, cop, or politician. .... Or for reasons of overcrowding or plea deals to get the quick close, which is BS too in my opinion. If a politician has an opportunity to look like a hero on the news you can set your watch by it!

he does deserve some sort of punishment. Too bad we cant render him sterile too.

 

[netsecurity]

but did he mean to kill her?

Part of him meant to shoot her obviously because he went through the motions and even had it aimed for the chest, which is a kill zone. If he had aimed for her brain bucket would it be different?

 

[Yup!]

Part of him meant to shoot her obviously because he went through the motions and even had it aimed for the chest, which is a kill zone. If he had aimed for her brain bucket would it be different?

i disagree again.

he meant to frighten her, he meant to intimidate her - I do not believe he meant to kill her.

he still needs to be charged, he still needs to do time, but he is not a murderer.

does someone who kills someone while driving drunk get charged with first degree murder?

 

[Trigger Time]

Part of him meant to shoot her obviously because he went through the motions and even had it aimed for the chest, which is a kill zone. If he had aimed for her brain bucket would it be different?

Na i think this dumbass just thought he was being cool because he had a gun and viewed it as something cool to show off instead of a deadly tool.
the act of him removing the magazine shows that he didn't intend harm. He just was too stupid and lacked the training to fully understand what properly clearing a firearm is and also that we don't point them at people we don't want to harm.
dumbasses in the shooting community make the same mistake at gun shows and in their own homes all the time.

 

[netsecurity]

i disagree again.

he meant to frighten her, he meant to intimidate her - I do not believe he meant to kill her.

he still needs to be charged, he still needs to do time, but he is not a murderer.

does someone who kills someone while driving drunk get charged with first degree murder?

I admitted first degree is too much, because a lot more evidence would be needed to prove premeditation (although it could have been planned nonetheless). So second degree murder is what I am thinking about. Per your drunk driving analogy, no it wouldn't be second degree murder if I got drunk and hit someone with my car, and they died. BUT, if I got drunk, and chased down a person who made me mad by spurring me while I was showing off my new car, and then decided to scare her by zooming at her and swerving--but lost control and killed her--would that be second degree? Think about it. I may not have intended to kill her in this hypothetical, but I knew there was a damn good chance she could wind up getting run over, and I just didn't care.

 

[churchmouse]

I just saw the pictures of this lovely and giving (by all accounts) young lady. This will be an emotional ordeal for all involved as emotions are running high in this thread.
I have raised my children and done all a parent can to protect and guide them. I have lost a son.

In the fact that the young A$$ hat had a gun.....was on probation and acting the fool around others, attempted to get the witnesses to lie about how it happened is enough in my mind for some higher level of punishment.

What I feel and think will have no bearing on how the Law see's this act. I am sure there is already much pressure being exerted for maximum penalty's.

 

[perry]

Less about the boy, more about the girl... she saved the lives of two young sisters three years ago after they had fallen through a nearly-frozen Morse Reservoir.

911 call reveals child's plea for help in Noblesville water rescue | Lifesaving Resources, LLC

That happened across the street from a friend's house...

This shooting has made international news - Indiana hero Aubrey Peters who saved two children from drowning is shot dead | Mail Online

 

[Yup!]

I admitted first degree is too much, because a lot more evidence would be needed to prove premeditation (although it could have been planned nonetheless). So second degree murder is what I am thinking about. Per your drunk driving analogy, no it wouldn't be second degree murder if I got drunk and hit someone with my car, and they died. BUT, if I got drunk, and chased down a person who made me mad by spurring me while I was showing off my new car, and then decided to scare her by zooming at her and swerving--but lost control and killed her--would that be second degree? Think about it.

so when you can convince me, he took the magazine out to "fool us" but still meant to kill her, I'll agree with you. This isn't murder. It's an accident, caused by a lack of training, poor judgement, and a disregard for firearm safety. He acted reckless, and should be charged as such. Nothing I've read says he thought the outcome of this situation would end with her being shot.

if he intended to shoot her in the arm, and she died, I'd give you second degree. He did not intend to shoot her.

 

[Fargo]

I admitted first degree is too much, because a lot more evidence would be needed to prove premeditation (although it could have been planned nonetheless). So second degree murder is what I am thinking about. Per your drunk driving analogy, no it wouldn't be second degree murder if I got drunk and hit someone with my car, and they died. BUT, if I got drunk, and chased down a person who made me mad by spurring me while I was showing off my new car, and then decided to scare her by zooming at her and swerving--but lost control and killed her--would that be second degree? Think about it. I may not have intended to kill her in this hypothetical, but I knew there was a damn good chance she could wind up getting run over, and I just didn't care.

Murder, by definition in Indiana, requires knowing/intentional killingl unless you are talking about Indiana's limited "felony murder" clause. If there is no intent to kill and she didn't die during an enumerated crime, there is no possibility of murder.

Murder
Note: This version of section effective until 7-1-2014. See also following version of this section amended by P.L.158-2013, SEC.410, effective 7-1-2014, and following version of this section amended by P.L.214-2013, SEC.35, effective 7-1-2014.
Sec. 1. A person who:
(1) knowingly or intentionally kills another human being;
(2) kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit arson, burglary, child molesting, consumer product tampering, criminal deviate conduct, kidnapping, rape, robbery, human trafficking, promotion of human trafficking, sexual trafficking of a minor, or carjacking;
(3) kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit:
(A) dealing in or manufacturing cocaine or a narcotic drug (IC 35-48-4-1);
(B) dealing in or manufacturing methamphetamine (IC 35-48-4-1.1);
(C) dealing in a schedule I, II, or III controlled substance (IC 35-48-4-2);
(D) dealing in a schedule IV controlled substance (IC 35-48-4-3); or
(E) dealing in a schedule V controlled substance; or
(4) knowingly or intentionally kills a fetus that has attained viability (as defined in IC 16-18-2-365);
commits murder, a felony.

The bolded part pretty much perfectly describes Reckless Homicide in Indiana.

Reckless homicide
Note: This version of section effective until 7-1-2014. See also following version of this section, effective 7-1-2014.
Sec. 5. A person who recklessly kills another human being commits reckless homicide, a Class C felony.

It could also potentially be Involuntary Manslaughter based upon Pointing a Firearm being an inherently dangerous act:

Involuntary manslaughter
Note: This version of section effective until 7-1-2014. See also following version of this section, effective 7-1-2014.
Sec. 4. (a) As used in this section, "child care provider" means a person who provides child care in or on behalf of:
(1) a child care center (as defined in IC 12-7-2-28.4); or
(2) a child care home (as defined in IC 12-7-2-28.6);
regardless of whether the child care center or child care home is licensed.
(b) As used in this section, "fetus" means a fetus that has attained viability (as defined in IC 16-18-2-365).
(c) A person who kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit:
(1) a Class C or Class D felony that inherently poses a risk of serious bodily injury;
(2) a Class A misdemeanor that inherently poses a risk of serious bodily injury; or
(3) battery;
commits involuntary manslaughter, a Class C felony. However, if the killing results from the operation of a vehicle, the offense is a Class D felony.

Best,

Joe

 

[churchmouse]

Less about the boy, more about the girl... she saved the lives of two young sisters three years ago after they had fallen through a nearly-frozen Morse Reservoir.

911 call reveals child's plea for help in Noblesville water rescue | Lifesaving Resources, LLC

That happened across the street from a friend's house...

This shooting has made international news - Indiana hero Aubrey Peters who saved two children from drowning is shot dead | Mail Online

That was my reference to her being a giving person.

 

[netsecurity]

It could also potentially be Involuntary Manslaughter based upon Pointing a Firearm being an inherently dangerous act:



Best,

Joe

Yea, okay, well IANAL but that is exactly my point. It was beyond reckless just to point the gun at her chest, but pulling the trigger is definitely dangerous to the extreme. He was aiming at her kill zone BTW, which is also murderously dangerous. So maybe they will up the charges to manslaughter.

I hope he gets the maximum everything obviously. It infuriates me when people do things like this and claim ignorance. I don't think its ignorance, it is disregard for safety at the highest level, at an intentional level.

I can accept a 3yo shooting himself as a tragic accident in my mind, but I cannot accept the arrogance and malfeasance of an ADULT playing with a gun and "murdering" someone.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Apparently he dropped the mag, pointed it at her and fired, not realizing there was still one in the chamber...

This is, by far, the most common type of accidental shooting I see. Self inflicted during cleaning of guns that require the trigger to be pulled and jacking around with an "unloaded" gun.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Had a round in the chamber and was clearly an inexperienced gun handler.

Hmmm……I wonder where this has been discussed before?

This is akin to complaining that the motorcyclist doing 185 on the highway in the rain didn't know to look for a DOT approved helmet because he's new to bikes. Not really the main issue, and the behavior is stupid on its own, not something to blame on inexperience.

It is something to complain about, though, so carry on.

 

[Racechase1]

The sad part is he didn't put the gun to his own head before he pulled the trigger. You can't fix stupid, but it would have culled the herd some. I feel sorry for the girls family, and absolutely zero sympathy for the shooters family.

 

[Bunnykid68]

The sad part is he didn't put the gun to his own head before he pulled the trigger. You can't fix stupid, but it would have culled the herd some. I feel sorry for the girls family, and absolutely zero sympathy for the shooters family.

That is the dumbest thing I have read all day.

 

[Racechase1]

I look at like this, if your going to play with a gun, the only victim of that kind of stupidity should be the one playing with it. Unfortunately it rarely works out that way.