OK I must admit that this case has me torn. On one hand I am thinking that it was racism why this Northern California prosecutor chose to charge this young man with first degree murder under the rarely used "Provocative Acts Doctrine." On the other hand I am thinking; Renato, just what the fuck were you thinking when you broke into that man's home with your friends?
Your ignorant ass actions set into motion an act that cost two of your friends their lives, and now you are on the verge of losing your freedom; and if the good folks of California have their way, maybe your life as well.
But please don't think I am letting Mister homeowner off the hook either. Yes, he has a right to defend his home, but he doesn't have a right to shoot two fleeing individuals in the back. Had I been the DA I would have charged his ass with at the very least, voluntary manslaughter. But we know how that works; small county, every one knows each other, no one wants to upset the order of things. Heck I am sure the DA was a friend of Mr. Homeowner, or maybe even a family member.
But back to these three Negroes who thought they could live out their own "American Gangster" fantasy and live to brag about it. Sorry fellows, this is the real world. You just don't go all gangster up into someones crib and not expect there to be consequences.
So good luck with this latest racial dust up NAACP. Yes I am sure race played a role in the DA's decision to charge old Renato. (What, you think if it was three white boys who ran up in that house and two of them got shot to death the DA would charge the third one with murder?)
But I swear the shit must be so hard for you all sometimes. Especially since there just ain't no more folks like Rosa Parks left out here.
Hmmmm... I dunno about this one, Field. I was with you until the part of the article where it says they beat the guy's kid to the point where he'll be fed by a machine for the rest of his life.
ReplyDeleteIf a group of guys broke into your home and beat your child so severely that he suffered permanent brain damage, and you had a gun, are you telling me that just because they turned and fled you wouldn't get some shots off at the bastards who near killed your boy? In your own home?
Genarlow Wilson they ain't.
Field,
ReplyDeleteRacism? Oh Bull--t!!! You seem to have a pattern of being sympathetic to criminals and thugs. Not every arrest or prosecution is racially motivated. I am tired of hearing that nonsense from Black folks. Could it be that this a**hole is being charged because he actually broke the law? That fact usually gets lost by Blacks who scream race at every opportunity.
You seem to suggest that the prosecutor is racist for bringing charges and that the homeowner is racist for shooting 2 INTRUDERS who were involved in a home invasion and assault. Come on Field!!! Stop the foolishness! You go too far in defending ignorant negroes. Should I start calling you Michael Eric Dyson? Because you are reaching Dyson territory with your excuse-making. That rap music probably has your mind screwed up. Turn the CD player off. These negroes were not the victims in this case. The only thing that went wrong here is that the homeowner didn't get Hughes. If I were in his shoes I would have done the same... but I would have had a better aim.
I'm with you on most of your posts... but when you contend that a man can't defend his home, then you've lost me. A man shouldn't have to retreat in his own house. That's why some States now have "stand your ground" laws. That "fleeing felon" nonsense shouldn't apply when the suspect is inside of your residence.
I'm all for the Provocative Acts Doctrine. I don't know what the big deal is here. I have heard of this doctrine being used before... it is not as unusual as the article seems to suggest.
Let's say a 25 year old gang leader takes a 15 year old new recruit along for a convenience store robbery...but once inside, the store owner pulls his gun at the same time that the 2 suspects pull theirs, and (fearing for his life) the store owner kills the 15 year old. YES...in this case, the 25 year old could be (and should be) charged with the murder of the child. The Provocative Acts Doctrine has been used in those kinds of cases before.... it's just that most of those cases don't attract media attention and go under the radar.
Now... the Prosecutors should be required to prove that Hughes was one of the ring leaders... or suggested the house... drove the other two to the location... planned the home invasion, conspired, or had some leadership role. If they can prove that..., then I think it's a good case.
A man being able to protect his home is one of the last rights that we have left in this Country(a right that has not been overly trampled yet by government). Please let us have it for a little while longer. Because once we lose that right... the flood gates will open. If you aren't safe in your home, then you aren't safe anywhere.
Sorry... when it comes to this issue... I'm Republican, lol.
~
ReplyDeleteField, you willing to feed* Renato Hughes Jr., 22, for the next 50 to 60 years?
If not, euthanatize this Negroe.
* it takes cash money dollar bills to house these ijits for life: electricity, gas, water, food, medical, dental, clothing, soap, toilet tissue, ...; Field you willing to pay that bill?
I saw something on TV once, where in some countries, a persons relatives must provide for their needs during incarceration. We need some of that here in the U.S.
Field, mayhap you'd like to become Renato Hughes Jr's, play-daddy?
`
"You seem to suggest that the prosecutor is racist for bringing charges and that the homeowner is racist for shooting 2 INTRUDERS who were involved in a home invasion and assault. Come on Field!!! "
ReplyDeleteA.I,. you left out the part where he shot them in the BACK!
Still, as Jimbo said, I am not sure if it wasn't me in this guy's position I wouldn't have done the same thing. But the law is the law. It should apply to the homeowner as well as the thuugs who broke into his home.
As a DA your job is to uphold the law, not let your emotions get the better of you.
And yes I have to wonder about the DA's motivation in this case. OK, so you don't charge the home owner, but you charge the third perp. with murder?
Please give me a break!
"Field, mayhap you'd like to become Renato Hughes Jr's, play-daddy?"
Projecting again nsangoma?
We have the right to defend our home and property. If someone busts into my house, they're going down.
ReplyDeleteNo one's walking out with MY big screen TV.
~
ReplyDeleteField, why don't you project on this great big diamond-one right here: paying for Renato Hughes Jr's, 22, life-time incarceration yourself.
`
"No one's walking out with MY big screen TV."
ReplyDeleteThat is too funny. I'm dying over here.
Field, I need you to expound on this Snuggles thing. Are you allowing the Plantation to give you the blues? Maybe you should sing a spiritual to help you cope.
Snuggles? I don't know about this one son.
Again, "Independent"'s reading comprehension and fails and fails miserably...
ReplyDeleteFN was VERY CLEAR where put most of the blame in this case; on the three dumbasses who committed the home invasion. But let FN attack the precious columns of society; the law and the suburbanite, and here "independent" comes with both guns blazing.
Whatever....
Field, love your blog but the NAACP need to GTFOH with 'racism' in this case. They beat his son with a baseball bat and now he has brain damage and can't feed himself. I'm only sad that he wasn't able to shoot this sack of shit either. The NAACP's excuse is that Edmonds had marijuana and prescription medication in his system when he shot those boys. Yet he has prescriptions for both AND his son was beat so severe that he now has brain damage. I know we, as a people, hate hearing about some of our own being killed but sometimes that gets in the way of us thinking about how we would react. Let me have the means to shoot at someone who just hurt a love one of mine and I'm not going to be thinking "Oh I can't shoot...they are running away".
ReplyDeleteThank you BK, I think I will have to start paying you to interpret my shit for the people who read here:)
ReplyDelete"Snuggles? I don't know about this one son."
I do; I love that guy!
"No one's walking out with MY big screen TV."
LOL!
Sorry, I do not see racism in this incident. I would have done the same thing if my family was threatened and especially if my child was severely beaten. If the perpetrators were trying to run when they saw the gun and got it in the back…oh well.
ReplyDeleteBTW Field:
Blogs you are feeling side link is like an FN award, I was surprise …thanks.
Field Negro. You are what's wrong in black america. The reason why black men ARE FAILING IN DROVES is because of you excuse makin' kneegrows!
ReplyDeleteNo, I don't think this brotha should be charged with murder. Technically, he didn't pull the trigger but he should be charged with attempted murder for the beating that boy.
The homeowner has a right to defend himself. Just because someone is walking or RUNNING away doesn't mean they can't turn around. Shit like that happens all the time. How do I know you're not running away to get YOUR GUN to come back and shoot my ass.
The NAACP is just embarrasing!!
I'm opposed to general gun-ownership. If you compare other societies with much tighter restrictions and far less violence, the only rational conclusion is that easy access to guns contributes to our problems here in America. Guns do kill people.
ReplyDeleteThat said, zero sympathy here. If you break into someone's house, you forfeit your rights to life, liberty and the protection of the constitution. Or at least you should. Your rights end where they trample my own.
Also, I'm curious about where you would place the sad story of Gerald Boyd of the NY Times (see the piece in New York Magazine this week). House or field?
he needs to go down for this & he is lucky he did not get shot.
ReplyDeletethe only thing iffy for me is charges against the home owner but sometimes the heat of dangerous moment can make you lose your right mind.
"You seem to have a pattern of being sympathetic to criminals and thugs." We can't save them all
Bygbaby
A.I,. you left out the part where he shot them in the BACK!
ReplyDeleteStill, as Jimbo said, I am not sure if it wasn't me in this guy's position I wouldn't have done the same thing. But the law is the law. It should apply to the homeowner as well as the thuugs who broke into his home.
As a DA your job is to uphold the law, not let your emotions get the better of you.
And yes I have to wonder about the DA's motivation in this case. OK, so you don't charge the home owner, but you charge the third perp. with murder?
Please give me a break!
Have you heard of the Castle Doctrine???? And "Shoot First"/"Stand Your Ground" laws? California doesn't have a Shoot First/Stand your Ground Law, but even based on basic self defense statutes, the homeowner seemed to be within the law. Link (California's Self Defense Statute at bottom of page).
I acknowledged the fact that they were shot in the back....because I mentioned the concept of shooting "Fleeing Felons". California law sucks... but even under its restrictive laws, the homeowner was still right to shoot to defend his son. They had already assaulted the boy so the homeowner (fearing death or further assaults) fired.
The DA was right not to punish this man for self defense.
If the s---heads got shot in the back... too bad. They could have turned to run just as the man fired... perhaps it was dark. You can't punish the homeowner for that. You are stretching (to say the least) with your analysis.
The victim of a home invasion typically doesn't have the burden of proof - to determine the intentions and plans of home invaders- before they can take action to protect themselves, their family and their property. And even from that perspective... in terms of intent of the suspects, we know that the son had been severely beaten (a life threatening assault). So the homeowner feared for his life and the life of those in his family. That satisfies the self defense doctrine. The Police, the DA and the Courts look at what the circumstances were the moment that the incident took place...and they apply self defense rules according to THAT ....not according to what we see in hindsight.
The law against shooting Fleeing Felons...and how it is applied is very discretionary...always has been. Every case is different. It all depends on the circumstances of an individual case. Most States are not in the habit of prosecuting homeowners for defending their dwellings. Although it does happen in cases of gross misconduct by the homeowner/victim (but this is rare). There did not seem to be gross misconduct by the homeowner in this case. Typically homeowners get the benefit of the doubt in these situations... NOT THE HOME INVADER. (and that's the way it should be).
Again Field... you tend to suggest that the criminal should get the benefit of the doubt rather than the victim...and this goes against how cases are typically prosecuted in this Country.
...in this case, i feel no sympathy for this cat...you break into someone's house and beat their child, you deserve whatever comes your way...i keep trying to remind black folks of that simple fact...YOU ARE BLACK IN AMERICA...that alone means that when you break the law, expect the most severe form and length of punishment...when you make stupid decisions, you pay for them...the type of sentences you can get for drug possession should have tipped anyone off...even if it is racially motivated...the whole gd nation and all its actions are racially motivated...this really should cease to be a shock...the naacp should sit down and find real causes to voice out against...i have a few for them...they won't hear me though...;)
ReplyDeleteI read about this yesterday. Sorry, one bunch of crmininals trying to rob another bunch of criminals. Who cares. Clearlake is a place where some very hard core druggies live. I'm having a hard time digging up any sympathy for any of them.
ReplyDeleteField, there's a situation that just occured out here in Houston yesterday. A neighbor decided to play cops with the robbers that were burglarizing his neighbor's home. He called 911 and told the 911 operator that he wanted to take his shotgun outside and shoot the black guys that were breaking in his neighbors house. Well, instead of listening to the 911-operator, who repeatedly told him to keep his behind in the house, he went outside, while on the phone with the 911 operator, and shot those two men, killing them instantly.
ReplyDeleteI believe that this white man should be charged with murder. It wasn't like the two men were breaking in his house. How you gon' go and shoot and kill someone for breaking in your neighbor's house, especially when you were told to keep yourself and your shotgun in the house.
It's amazing to me how many black folks are saying that the killer was justified to kill these robbers. I really wonder if people would be as sympothetic if the shootter was black and had gunned down two white men.
Angie
@angie
ReplyDeleteyou just relayed two completely different situations! please go back and re-read your post. Better yet, finish school.
"@angie
ReplyDeleteyou just relayed two completely different situations! please go back and re-read your post. Better yet, finish school." Anon
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Angie, now you know those two situations are completely different. In that case, of course the man should be charged with murder. It wasn't his property. No one was threatened and he was also told not to do it. In this case, the guy's son was beaten with a baseball bat to the point he can't feed himself. You can't tell me that if put in that situation, you wouldn't have shot those fools because "they were running away". Come on. Let's be reasonable. I'd probably put two more in them just to make sure. If it was a black guy that shot and killed two criminals and he got charged with murder, we'd all be screaming bloody murder.
ReplyDeleteSupport your local police. But keep a shotty just in case.
ReplyDeleteA.I., you are mostly right about your self defense analysis. But you are still missing my point about the DA's discretion to charge. Here in PA for instance, we are a "retreat" jurisdiction. And I know it varies from state to state and I am not sure what it is in Ca. Still, when faced with a threat of potential deadly force, individuals have a right to protect their homes by using deadly force. But this is not to protect your home per se, it's to protect your family in your home. Here in Pa. once the threat is over you cannot use deadly force in self defense.In the present case, I am not sure if the threat was over or not. I know everyone is being emotional because of what happened to the home owner's son, but we all need to step back a little.
ReplyDeleteI have to read the story again. I am not even sure if the home owner shot the two perps outside or within the curtelidge of the home.
Bottom line, you have to look at the totality of the circumstances in each case.
Just ask yourself this A.I.; if the homeowner was black and the three perps were white, would you feel the same way? And to be honest; I have to ask myself the same thing if the situation was reversed.
Um, excuse me? What is up with being accused of comparing the two situations?
ReplyDeleteMaybe I shouldn't have brought up what happened here in Houston to you people. I see that there are some, Anonmymous 1 and 2, as well as Chris, that seem to think that I have somehow compared and locked these two very different incidents together.
I simply got the news of what happened here in Houston on my way to work. When I got to work, I thought I would see what was happening over here at the Field Negro. The story that Field wrote about just caused me to continue thinking about what happened here in Houston. I never once even commented on Field's initial post. I was simply informing him of a situation that occured here.
Why is that so hard to understand? Perhaps I should do better at clarifying next time.
And to the anonymous posters above: It takes a little more than that to get me upset, or to even amuse me, for that matter. Next time, come a little harder than that. Then mayby, and I mean maybe, I might be impressed.
Angie
No one's walking out with MY big screen TV.
ReplyDeletenow that was funny!
His mother is a school teacher. I am about to lose hope people.
I just read: "The Provocative Act doctrine does not require prosecutors to prove the accused intended to kill. Instead, 'they have to show that it was reasonably foreseeable that the criminal enterprise could trigger a fatal response from the homeowner,' said Brian Getz, a San Francisco defense attorney unconnected to the case."
ReplyDeleteWhat's with these laws/acts that require a crystal ball? I'm thinking of the Law of Parties also. And I only know of it as it pertains to former deathrow inmate Kenneth Foster. Who says: "the LOP means that you can be convicted of guilt by association, even if you didn’t actually commit the crime, and even if you were not present at the crime scene, if you were involved in the planning or commission of the crime, although you did not know a murder was going to be committed.
The story, as written, seems to indicate that the two deceased robbers were shot in the house.
ReplyDeleteAnd that changes everything. I agree with those who believe that there too much chaos existed inside the house for "shooting in the back" to be a factor against the homeowner.
Three people running and dodging through a home still pose a significant threat to the residents. I don't much care that their backs were turned to the shooter at the time the shots were fired.
The beating of the son already revealed the violent nature of their "visit."
As a black woman, I'm disgusted to see another one of our black men getting caught in no-good. But I tend to sympathize with the homeowner on this one.
Now, if only the precedent would stick in a similar yet color-reversed situation...
Im not cool with Snuggles either. He seems like a Stepin Fetchit to me, always smiling n gigglin all the time. Whats he got to be so happy about??!!
ReplyDeleteL
angie:
ReplyDeleteI understood what you were doing, because Field's post also reminded me of break-ins here in Minneapolis. Here, poor, drugged-up black men are busting into people's houses, robbing and doing other things too.
I know we should try and stick to the content of Field's post and that hidden below the content is one or more things to consider or remember, like know the law and keep in mind and don't just be emotional. But I think we should also allow a little flexibility.
Right now, I'm thinking seriously about what I would do if someone came busting through my door. So far, the only thing I can come up with is what Malcolm said when they asked him why he wasn't nonviolent like ol boy Dr. King. He said, "The honourable Elijah Muhammad teaches us to be humble, to be respectful, to be peaceful. But when a man puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetary!" No disrespect, brotha Malcolm, but i'm not even waiting that long. If they start busting down my door, i'm dialing 911 with one hand and blasting with the other. And if a trespasser should get one in the back, oh well...
Hawa, you're right. If the situation was color-reversed, and the black homeowner was charged with murder by the DA for doing the same thing to white robbers, time to make a real and justified stink about it.
ReplyDeleteBut I think the NAACP is making a mistake putting this case and this assailant up there as an example of racism to be rectified.
Does racism exist in the justice system at the time of indictment and sentencing? Of course.
But the NAACP can't be effective if it loses credibility... pick your battles!
Right now, there are black and Hispanic men rotting in prison for rapes they didn't commit, when a simple DNA test would exonerate them. THAT is what the NAACP should be doing... raising white America's awareness of this REAL injustice... and demanding MANDATORY DNA testing of the accused in EVERY rape and murder trial in the state and federal justice systems.
That would really help black America, and go a long way towards abolishing the death penalty and helping innocent blacks get released from prison.
Jimbo: Amen.
ReplyDeleteSome years ago my son who was 2.5 years old and I were coming out of our Jeep and this dog came up to attack us. Now I am deathly afraid of dogs even when they seem non-threatening, and had it just been me I would've stayed in the car for hours if need be, but my baby was there. Now when that son of a bitch came up, something snapped and I pulled a knife so fast, that damned thing backed down because I may have been bitten but I would've gutted him like a rabid beast if need be to protect my child.
ReplyDeleteI can only imagine what that owner felt like AFTER his son was beaten so brutally.
I don't know how many of you are parents, but I think most of us would agree that if someone did that to the child we raised from baby to adult, that somebody's getting shot. I wouldn't have tried to kill them, but some bullets are being shot and they would have to land where they land.
I'm not sitting on any high horse and condemning that man in any form because we all know the saying right? "You live by the sword, you die by the sword." If they really wanted better odds of living they would've stayed their asses home and not been robbing folks for their hard earned goods and brutalizing their son.
Life is definitely like gambling. They played a losing hand willingly, hoping it would amount to something.
Eugenics, eugenics, eugenics. I feel nothing for these guys. I'm sorry. We need to pick our battles now.
ReplyDeleteFN,
ReplyDeleteUsually I feel ya, but here's my thing:
IF you break into someone's home..
And you have the misfortune of that being someone who believes and practices their 2nd Amendment Rights..
Then, hey, you get what you deserve.
And once they put their hands on his child?
FN, come on. You gotta be kidding me that you're wasting ink on this.
I'm not going to think about this Negro one nanosecond more than it took to read your post.
"Genarlow Wilson they ain't."
ReplyDeleteOf course not Jimbo, he is still alive.
"Im not cool with Snuggles either. He seems like a Stepin Fetchit to me, always smiling n gigglin all the time. Whats he got to be so happy about??!!"
Don't sleep on snuggles. Beneath that smile is a man of action ;)
"Genarlow Wilson they ain't."
ReplyDeleteOf course not Jimbo, he is still alive.
Field, Genarlow Wilson was a legitimate victim of overzealous D.A.s, racial profiling, and insane sentencing that did not take into account age, personal circumstances, or basic principles of humanity.
But Genarlow Wilson did not break into someone's house and beat their kid's head with a baseball bat until they became a vegetable.
"Eugenics, eugenics, eugenics. I feel nothing for these guys. I'm sorry. We need to pick our battles now".
ReplyDelete"Eugenics, eugenics, eugenics", meaning...what" That you think this guy and others are genetically inferior to you, and should be eliminated?
The homeowner should be charge.. with not shooting the 3rd one. Fight crime, shoot back. You know if it happen to you, you would be just a quick to pull the strap, quit fooling yourself. Thanks for nouthing from the naaLcp (the L is for liberal)
ReplyDeleteI wish Mista was my neighbor. I think?? LOL.
ReplyDeletePEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE! You are missing the point. This post was more of an indictment of the DA than the homeowner (although I think he should have been charged) I already said up thread that I probably would have done the same thing the homeowner did if I was in his position.
ReplyDeleteI think everyone agrees that if someone kicks your door in, they are doing so at their own risk. And quite a few of you seem to have forgotten that I slammed these dumb ass Negroes for doing just that.
This post was not about the homeowner,this post was about the DA charging the third perp. with murder based on the death of his cohorts by using a seldom used legal doctrine. And wondering if the perp was white would he (The DA) have done the same thing.
The other two lost their lives. That idiot is still alive. I think being charged with that law isn't going to hurt him anymore than the other two "chilling" in a morgue somewhere.......
ReplyDeleteI think I responded appropriately. No sympathy. Some folks think it's sad the son was beaten. Thing is, the son was a 21 year old adult who was probably activly involved in dad's drug dealing enterprise. If he wasn't, then dear old dad gets to live with the consequences of having endangered his family by being a drug dealing low life.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who gets to live up close and personal to drug activity, I ran out of sympathy for these guys about a decade ago. That goes for the guy who did the shooting, the guys who got shot, and the guy who gets to pay the piper. I don't care what color they are and I don't care what happens to any of them.
First of all, I was joking, clown. Second, eugenics doesn'tmean "genetics." It means making sure dumbasses like these fools who broke into dude's house don't breed, else we're in for Mike Judge's movie "Idiocracy." Mr. Charlie needs a buffer caste of NASCAR dads and mall wives and trailer trash in order to keep the social order. We don't...
ReplyDeletewink wink
"Mr. Charlie needs a buffer caste of NASCAR dads and mall wives and trailer trash in order to keep the social order. We don't..."
ReplyDeleteI beg to differ, Mr. Chambers. When you guys figure out how to get rid of your lower caste, let me know... I wish we could get rid of ours.
They are responsible not only for Republican political domination but also Walmart, beer helmets, professional wrestling and Squeezable Cheez.
They've got to go.
The clown asks...Eugenics is not related to genetics...how?
ReplyDeleteField, Wouldn't the charge against the suspect come under the classification of "felony murder" seeing as a murder was committed in the commission of a felony?
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't think that there would be too many juries anywhere that would convict the homeowner. Hell, temporary insanity.
Hartia event management can do your events,anywhere in India and have already executed events in Delhi,Jaipur Indore, Kochin, Goa etc. Based on your brief, goals, budget we can organize and manage the event for you. We offer our services in Corporate Events, Sporting Events, Special Events,Birthday, Promotions etc.
ReplyDeleteExhibition Setup in Mumbai
Events Management in Mumbai