Missouri’s “Castle Doctrine” Law Under Scrutiny?
Question:
Im 12 years Old and I think this is a great law.
Missouri’s “castle doctrine” law, passed last year, continues to draw controversy and debate even as property owners use it to defend themselves and what they own.
The castle doctrine law allows Missourians to use deadly force when necessary to defend themselves from attackers. Advocates praise the measure as a means for innocent people to defend themselves against criminals. But critics of the law fear it could result in the unnecessary deaths of petty thieves and that hardened criminals could hide behind the act as a legal way of killing others.
Officials question just how far people can go when someone enters their home and they are looking to court cases to help sort out the interpretations. Judges and attorneys familiar with the law say that Missouri’s version appears to allow killings like one that happened in Texas last November where a man saw two burglars carrying items from his neighbor’s house, then grabbed a shotgun and killed the burglars.
The Missouri statute appears to legalize the killing of anyone who unlawfully enters a house or a car, or who commits a forcible felony like robbery, burglary, arson, kidnapping, assault or rape.
But a committee working on jury instructions for the law is taking a somewhat more narrow approach. Jackson County Judge Charles Atwell, who chairs the committee, said the previous Missouri law had a “reasonableness” standard in it and feels that, since the new law uses the term “reasonable,” juries should take the standard into account.
The “reasonableness” standard from the old law meant that a person had to believe they or another individual was in serious danger before deadly force could be used.
Those jury instructions could prove pivotal, according to prosecutors in the state. They are due to be completed in the next month or so and are then subject to acceptance by the Missouri Supreme Court.
Last week, a pizza deliveryman in Pagedale, a St. Louis suburb, was robbed at gunpoint when he brought a pizza to Rodney Reese and Brian Smith after they had called in the order. The pizza deliveryman, fearing for his life, fired his own gun, killing Smith. Reese was able to get away with the pizzas and the deliveryman’s wallet but was apprehended later. Reese is being held on $250,000 bond on armed criminal action, robbery and second-degree murder charges.
The same day, Henry Brown was shot and killed when he tried breaking into an apartment in Columbia. Officials there said that the shooter, Alvin Canton, clearly acted in self-defense and is protected under the castle doctrine law.
Answer:
Check out the Wikipedia article on Castle Doctrine. I don't know how the Missouri law actually reads, but, generally, the castle doctrine laws allow the home owner to consider an intruder in their home a deadly threat and allows the use of deadly force. The law protects the home owner against both criminal and civil charges.
The fellow in Texas does not really fall under the protection of the Castle Doctrine because it was not his property nor was it his home that was invaded. He might get off simply because Texans don't much like criminals anyway.
The pizza delivery incident does not fall under the castle doctrine at all. This was simply a case of self defense against two armed robbers.
The Henry Brown incident is the only one you quote that actually would fall under the Castle Doctrine.
|
