General Categories > Newsworthy

Possible Castle Doctorine case in Ohio.

(1/2) > >>

NE Bull:
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/8000

A woman was right to believe a piece of paper would not stop her violent ex-boyfriend and took steps to protect herself and her kids.  Will try to follow this case to court and see if the Castle Doctrine holds up.  Seems to be cut and dried, unless a shark lawyer tries to prove it was premeditated, then it might get ugly.

DaveB:
It's good to know where she lives now, the next guy needs to be prepared knowing she has a gun and will use it.


Disclaimer:
Hope the story is accurate, I was not there, but I'm sure there is more to it than that.

OnTheFly:

--- Quote ---A news release said the case will be presented to a grand jury.

Under Ohio's Castle Doctrine law, if someone unlawfully enters an occupied home or temporary habitation, or occupied car, citizens have an initial presumption that they may act in self defense, and will not be second-guessed by the State.
--- End quote ---

These seem to be two opposing statements.

Fly

omaharj:

--- Quote from: OnTheFly on October 04, 2011, 11:29:11 AM ---These seem to be two opposing statement.

Fly

--- End quote ---
Perhaps not. As I understand it, the procedure is anytime someone dies from an incident (not natural causes),it goes in front of the Grand Jury. They will be guided by Castle Doctrine and (hopefully) will not tell the DA to prosecute. IANAL, the exact phrasing of the Grand Jury process is obviously more complicated. Without Castle Doctrine, the GJ will almost always refer it to the DA.

DanClrk51:
I thought that the presumption clause of the Castle Doctrine usually protects someone completely in such a situation. I remember the papers complaining about two cases in Montana because the "suspects" could not be arrested because there was no evidence to support any murder charges or something like that.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page