[Flipside]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-27243115

A German student is shot dead for being on someone elses property after the homeowner deliberately leaves the garage door open with a handbag in view for the sole purpose of attracting criminals to shoot.

Whilst it's obvious the person should not have been there, I'm not sure how this qualifies as 'believing the invader was a threat' for a start, and when there is a deliberate lure placed there in order to do this it sounds pre-meditated, not with a specific target in mind, but with any target in mind.

This isn't like a bait-car scenario, where the Police wait until a crime is actually committed before springing the trap, this was an assumption that because the person was there, they must be a criminal and they must be a threat.

On the plus side, the shooter has been charged with Murder, but it's appalling that someone, a firefighter of all things, thought that this was how the law worked.

[Goober5000]

I'd say that the assumption the student was a criminal was valid, but the assumption that he was a threat was not.  Montana's Castle Doctrine only applies if the homeowner "reasonably believes" the intruder is a threat, and his behavior doesn't sound reasonable to me, especially firing blindly into the garage without ascertaining the situation.

Gun safety courses have clear rules about escalation of threat levels and appropriate use of force, and based on the article, it doesn't sound like any of them were followed.

[Flipside]

I'd say the victim was a criminal to the point that he was trespassing on private property, but my concern is that everything beyond that point is based on the assumption of what he was doing, not the investigation of it.

Thing is, a few weeks ago when coming home late with Sharon, I noticed a mobile phone in someone's front garden. I went into the garden, picked up the phone, took it to their front door and knocked to ask if anyone had lost a phone (asking its make to ensure accuracy). This is not an uncommon occurrence in areas of Europe. I'm not saying that this young man definitely had no criminal intentions when he entered the property, but there's no assurance that he did have criminal intentions either.

What concerns me more is the idea of sitting up all night with sensors, gun at the ready, while you try to deliberately lure in criminals to shoot. That's not really an indication of a healthy attitude towards home-safety and more an eagerness to 'shoot me some baddies'.

[MP-Ryan]

There is a 0% chance the shooter will be found not guilty if the judicial instructions at trial are correct.

Castle Doctrines are based on the common-law right to defense of person and property (which exists even in the UK, I might add).  The force used must be reasonable in the circumstances.  Various legal jurisdictions have various nuanced phrasing of the principle, with some being more lax and others being more stringent, but the central core is that the force must be proportionate to the threat.  This holds true even in Montana.  The accused is going to have an extremely uphill battle to say that he reasonably believed a student entering his open, baited garage meant to do him harm when he watched him on audio/video with gun in hand, then fired into his garage with no provocation other than the student's presence.

Entrapment only applies to state actors and is not relevant to this case.

[Flipside]

Well, as I've said, my problem isn't with the States reaction to their behaviour, it seems the general consensus of both the State and everyone in this thread is that what happened was a gross misinterpretation of the law. I think it's more the shooters belief that he was within the law that appalls me, the State appear to have acted in a proper manner throughout from what information I have.

As far as my use of the word Entrapment, to be honest, I did worry that it would be interpreted as it has been and thought about changing it, but I meant it from the more generic meaning, as in 'setting up a trap'. When this is done for the purpose of shooting someone, it carries a very sinister overtone.

[jr2]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/hear-graphic-audio-catches-moment-byron-smith-guns-teens-article-1.1776145


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/jury-listens-chilling-audio-minnesota-man-fatally-shooting-teen-intruders-article-1.1765846


Some looney from the State Department had the same idea after a spree of breakins in his neighborhood. Moved his car so it looked like he was gone and waited in the basement.  Set up audio to record it all.

Edit: more sources

http://abcnews.go.com/US/minnesota-man-accused-murdering-teens-entered-home/story?id=23419342

http://wjon.com/breaking-news-jury-finds-byron-smith-guilty-of-murder/