GUILTY MI - Renisha McBride, 19, shot while trying to get help, Detroit, Nov 2013

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

imo, if I live where this guy did, on the border of Detroit, there's a 95-100% chance that someone trying my doors at 3:40 a.m. is a criminal. Most likely a home invasion or minimum a burglary with a weapon. Like I said, I would never live there voluntarily. But if you DO live there, imo, you can't be faulted for reaching the most likely conclusion about why someone's trying to get into your house in the wee hours. Whether this shooting was accidental, justified or otherwise, is the only question in my mind. I have no doubt that the homeowner thought he was in grave danger, even though it fortuitously turned out he probably was not. jmo
 
tlcya said:
I tend to feel where she was prior etc is not relevant to whether this homeowner acted improperly under the eyes of the law or not. The homeowner could have no knowledge of those actions and therefore they do not factor into his decisions that night.

The some of the victim's poor decisions are known due to the tox reports, and while they may have played a role in her behaviors that evening, the decision to drink or get high did not have anything to do with the homeowner's decision to shoot her. Some behaviors that MAY have been a result of her poor decision may have factored into his, such as MAYBE trying to get into his home but even all of that is still one big unknown.

I disagree with the homeowner's actions that night. I feel they were irresponsible at the least and maybe more but cannot say that without more info.

Cases like this just continue to come up and with each one it only cements my own distaste and disagreement with how SYG and castle doctrine is being interpreted and applied in general in this country.

Hurry up tomorrow. Please bring more info and clarity to this case.
Click to expand...

WHERE SHE WAS BEFORE THE ACCIDENT has a lot to do with this entire thing. Underaged drinker who was legally drunk drove a car, wrecked and then went to someones house for whatever reason. IMO ALL THAT IS RELAVENT. was she confused, thought she was at home and beat on windows, doors, etc.
 
Was it reported if a 911 call was made about her car accident? Surely someone heard the crash?...or maybe not.
 
CHERIE.T said:
Was it reported if a 911 call was made about her car accident? Surely someone heard the crash?...or maybe not.
Click to expand...


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/12/renisha-mcbride-timeline_n_4262019.html

in that link it shows the calls received about the accident and the times.

the 911 audio is supposed to be released after any arraignment following charges (if there are charges), if there are no charges i dont know how they will handle the release of 911 calls, and it is not a certainty that he would be arraigned today if charged (is it?)

im very interested to know if any other 911 calls were received that night related to the missing 3+ hours after the accident, or if any neighbors called to report hearing the shooting as was initially reported by the family.
 
CHERIE.T said:
WHERE SHE WAS BEFORE THE ACCIDENT has a lot to do with this entire thing. Underaged drinker who was legally drunk drove a car, wrecked and then went to someones house for whatever reason. IMO ALL THAT IS RELAVENT. was she confused, thought she was at home and beat on windows, doors, etc.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, I disagree. Where she was beforehand has nothing to do with whether the homeowner acted properly in the eyes of the law. For example, if a woman is raped, what she was wearing isn't relevant. The same concept applies here. While Renisha's actions at the homeowner's house is relevant in determining whether the homeowner acted appropriately, what she was doing before the accident isn't.
 
CHERIE.T said:
WHERE SHE WAS BEFORE THE ACCIDENT has a lot to do with this entire thing. Underaged drinker who was legally drunk drove a car, wrecked and then went to someones house for whatever reason. IMO ALL THAT IS RELAVENT. was she confused, thought she was at home and beat on windows, doors, etc.
Click to expand...

agreeing to disagree
 
liljim said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/12/renisha-mcbride-timeline_n_4262019.html

in that link it shows the calls received about the accident and the times.

the 911 audio is supposed to be released after any arraignment following charges (if there are charges), if there are no charges i dont know how they will handle the release of 911 calls, and it is not a certainty that he would be arraigned today if charged (is it?)

im very interested to know if any other 911 calls were received that night related to the missing 3+ hours after the accident, or if any neighbors called to report hearing the shooting as was initially reported by the family.
Click to expand...

Thank you! I agree with you about any other 911 calls.....they could offer much needed information imo. Her walking about or being unaccounted for for approx. 3 hours bothers me....again was she knocked out for a while? I keep thinking she may have been attacked after the accident. only speculating
 
AnaTeresa said:
Respectfully, I disagree. Where she was beforehand has nothing to do with whether the homeowner acted properly in the eyes of the law. For example, if a woman is raped, what she was wearing isn't relevant. The same concept applies here. While Renisha's actions at the homeowner's house is relevant in determining whether the homeowner acted appropriately, what she was doing before the accident isn't.
Click to expand...

We are not talking about her dress. We are talking about intoxication above the legal limit, which could explain her apparently erratic behavior.
 
If the victim just happened upon the porch to the shooter's house and simply knocked on the door....that's one thing. BUT if the victim was injured or drunk and say stumbling about on the stoop, her prior whereabouts imoo play into this. Previous whereabouts are legal consideration for example when a drunk driver has an accident after leaving a bar. The bar in some states can be sued for allowing a drunk patron to leave and drive.
 
Shooting victim had elevated blood alcohol

Toxicology report says Renisha McBride also had marijuana in her system

Author: By Ray Sanchez and Rande Iaboni CNN

Published On: Nov 15 2013 08:41:46 AM EST

(CNN) -
A 19-year-old Detroit woman who was shot and killed on the front porch of a Michigan home had a blood alcohol level nearly three times the legal limit for drivers in the state, according to a toxicology report released Thursday.

Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy, meanwhile, was scheduled to make an announcement Friday about a review of possible charges against the homeowner who fired the fatal shotgun blast.

The report from the Wayne County Medical Examiner's Office said Renisha McBride's alcohol level was 0.218 percent. The legal limit for drivers in Michigan is 0.08 percent...

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/...ohol/-/1719418/22986846/-/m1o2n7/-/index.html
 
November 15, 2013 at 8:14 am

Worthy making announcement in McBride case today
Oralandar Brand-Williams /The Detroit News

Detroit — An announcement in the fatal shooting case of 19-year-old Detroiter Renisha McBride will be made late Friday morning by Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy.

Worthy has scheduled an 11 a.m. news conference at her office in the Frank Murphy Hall of Justice. It is expected Worthy will say her decision on whether charges will be filed in the case. The announcement of a news conference comes two days after the prosecutor’s office said it had received additional items it needed to further make its decision on charges...

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20131115/METRO01/311150064#ixzz2kj0EXNuN
 
Our police sources are telling us that police concluded an additional investigation by Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy that Worthy requested from them.
She also has invited police to her offices Friday morning before she makes an announcement at 11 a.m. Worthy has not told police if there will be charges yet, but they are confident that is what they will hear tomorrow.
If charges are announced, Thurswell said the minimum charge the homeowner should face is manslaughter.
“To get a conviction for manslaughter you show that he shot and killed her and he was upset and excited and he pulled the gun, he pulled the trigger,” said Thurswell.


Read more: http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/region...-according-to-toxicology-report#ixzz2kj1rdzme
Click to expand...

----------
 
eileenhawkeye said:
But why the need to think of any possible scenario to absolve this man of blame/guilt? Multiple intruders...close to Detroit...houses looked similar...break-ins in the past and on and on. The lawyer for the owner hasn't even brought up any of these excuses yet.
Click to expand...

Because a homeowner has the right to defend himself/his home if he feels threatened, and her behavior may have made him feel threatened. Again, she did not deserve to be shot, that is understood and agreed, but HE likely had no way of knowing who she was and why she was banging on his door (or trying to get in or whatever she MAY have been doing), ergo, if she was behaving in an erratic or threatening manner then he is justified in his action, however tragic they turned out to be.

Karmady said:
imo, if I live where this guy did, on the border of Detroit, there's a 95-100% chance that someone trying my doors at 3:40 a.m. is a criminal. Most likely a home invasion or minimum a burglary with a weapon. Like I said, I would never live there voluntarily. But if you DO live there, imo, you can't be faulted for reaching the most likely conclusion about why someone's trying to get into your house in the wee hours. Whether this shooting was accidental, justified or otherwise, is the only question in my mind. I have no doubt that the homeowner thought he was in grave danger, even though it fortuitously turned out he probably was not. jmo
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

AnaTeresa said:
Respectfully, I disagree. Where she was beforehand has nothing to do with whether the homeowner acted properly in the eyes of the law. For example, if a woman is raped, what she was wearing isn't relevant. The same concept applies here. While Renisha's actions at the homeowner's house is relevant in determining whether the homeowner acted appropriately, what she was doing before the accident isn't.
Click to expand...

Not even REMOTELY the same. No. A woman minding her own business wearing whatever she wants is NOT the same as a highly intoxicated individual who may or may not have been acting in a frightening manner. I can't believe the two are even comparable :facepalm:

ETA: The reason her whereabouts and actions beforehand are relevant is because they might be contributing to her behavior on the porch. You said yourself her actions at the house are relevant. Well, what led to her even being on that porch?



Again, disclaimer, so no one gets the wrong idea. I desperately wish the homeowner had chosen a different course of action. Stayed inside, called the police, went upstairs and barricaded himself in a bedroom if he felt threatened. I fully support gun ownership, and I wouldn't go to the door if I thought someone were trying to get in my house. BUT, if if if Renisha were trying to gain entry, his actions are regrettable but (I hesitate to use this word) understandable.

Also, for some reason, I have a weird feeling that he didn't intend to fire his shotgun but his finger was on the trigger (shouldn't have been, should never have your finger on a trigger unless you are actively about to fire it).
 
I am splitting it down the middle. I am sitting in that grey area somewhere in between.

I feel her actions and behaviors while on the homeowner's property may be very relevant and factor into his decision to shoot. I feel her actions prior to the shooting, before she set foot on his property, including who she drank and partied with and where is completely irrelevant as the homeowner had no way of knowing any of that and therefor THAT info could NOT be a factor in his response.
 
tlcya said:
I am splitting it down the middle. I am sitting in that grey area somewhere in between.

I feel her actions and behaviors while on the homeowner's property may be very relevant and factor into his decision to shoot. I feel her actions prior to the shooting, before she set foot on his property, including who she drank and partied with and where is completely irrelevant as the homeowner had no way of knowing any of that and therefor THAT info could NOT be a factor in his response.
Click to expand...

Me, too. It sounds like such a tragic situation for both of them. She may have been so disorientated that she thought she was home and tried to get in past him and he shot her (not intentionally which is why he is saying the gun with off accidentally). I hope they release his statement so at least her family will understand what actually happened. jmo
 
CHERIE.T said:
am I invisable
Click to expand...

No, I feel that way alot of times. You can't reply to every post. I get ignored on many other threads:tantrum: I'm local to this and maybe my opinion doesn't count either, Don't take it personally.:please:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 176 more.
Total: 2,766 (members: 177, guests: 2,589)

Online statistics

Members online
177
Guests online
2,589
Total visitors
2,766
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,411
Messages
18,156,148
Members
231,724
Latest member
Marisa_breanna97
Back
Top