Close Topic Options

Guilty Or Innocent Revisted

An older gentleman is on a train. A group of 4 youths attempt to mug him for some cash. He has a gun with him (illegally) and shoots at them, severely wounding one. The gentleman is charged with approximately 10 different crimes for the shootings. Was he justified or not in his actions...and...did the jury reach the correct conclusion?

https://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/lawgoetz.html

This trial was very well followed in the 80's. Meet Bernie Goetz.

Just a thought,

Vincenzo

Revisted Innocent Guilty

The way I understand the contents of the web page, the guys that asked him for the money never actually threatened him. And even if they did, all they asked for was $5! Is $5 a good reason for trying to kill 4 human beings? I think the jury reached the correct verdict.

Guilty Or Innocent Revisted History & Civil Business Politics

I believe the man is guilty because he broke the law. It was illegal for him to carry a gun. Therefore, he broke the law when he carried the gun. It is sad that he was trying to defend himself (if in fact that is true), but you can't make exceptions to the law because of his reasons for using the gun. If you do that, then everyone will start carrying guns unlawfully figuring when they need it, no one will care that they had it illegally.

Now, I have read a bit about this case in the past. There has been much to suggest that this man was a bit more than just an innocent victim. It has been suggested that he was actually looking for trouble. In addition, as already was stated, there is such a thing as excessive force, which I believe was definately used in this case. This story even says he went over after the he was definately in no danger and fired another shot. You can't just shoot someone for asking for money. In fact, you can't just shoot someone for trying to rob you. You must believe your life is in danger. I am not sure his was. It doesn't appear as though it was.