FL - Mother shoots daughter, mistaking her for intruder

[al66pine]

If Mom is arrested for causing Dau's death, canshe successfully use Castle Doctrine self-defense or Stand Your Ground?May hinge on some facts not yet known to us.
My interp of decision tree for FL law is below. JM2cts.I'm curious to see if others interp statutedifferently.


FIRST
If Dau entered unlawfully (i.e., not resident, not invited guest) and forcibly (i.e., no key), per subsec(1)para(a), {ß--- unclear to me from MSM}
and
if Momknew or had reason to believe someone entered unlawfully and forcibly, per(1)(b),
then per para(1), Mom is presumed to have reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or greatbodily harm, when she fired gun or threatened to fire. IIUC, she has no burdenof proof to present evd of her fear, as the law presumes it.

^^^Summary: if dau did not live there, not a guest, just broke in, then Mom mayhave legit Castle Doctrine defense, imo.^^^

BUT
If Dau = residentor guest, then per para(2)(a), presumed-fear of subsec(1) does not apply.
IIUC, Mom does not get benefit of presumed fear of life. To justify firingat dau or even ‘warning shot’, Mom wd have burden of proof to show she actuallyfeared for life. Why/what would Mom fearif Dau was resident or guest? Maybe unexpectedly late time of arrival, IDK.

ALSO,
if Dau was not resident or invited guest {ß---MSM vague or conflicting on this, imo}
then per subsec(4), Dau is presumed to be in house w intent to commitan unlawful act involving force or violence.

FINALLY
if Dau attacked Mom before Mom fired {ß-No MSM mentn of Dau attack in MSM I've seen}, Mom may pleadSYG pre-trial. In pre-trial hearing FL judge rules on whether SYG can be usedat trial, and if allowed, jury decides whether SYG applies.
If Dau did not attack Mom before gunfire, pleaw SYG defense is not avail to Mom, imo.


Wondering if others agree or see itdifferently. Thx in adv.

 

[ohreally]

If Mom is arrested for causing Dau's death, canshe successfully use Castle Doctrine self-defense or Stand Your Ground?May hinge on some facts not yet known to us.
My interp of decision tree for FL law is below. JM2cts.I'm curious to see if others interp statutedifferently.


FIRST
If Dau entered unlawfully (i.e., not resident, not invited guest) and forcibly (i.e., no key), per subsec(1)para(a), {ß--- unclear to me from MSM}
and
if Momknew or had reason to believe someone entered unlawfully and forcibly, per(1)(b),
then per para(1), Mom is presumed to have reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or greatbodily harm, when she fired gun or threatened to fire. IIUC, she has no burdenof proof to present evd of her fear, as the law presumes it.

^^^Summary: if dau did not live there, not a guest, just broke in, then Mom mayhave legit Castle Doctrine defense, imo.^^^

BUT
If Dau = residentor uguest, then per para(2)(a), presumed-fear of subsec(1) does not apply.
IIUC, Mom does not get benefit of presumed fear of life. To justify firingat dau or even ‘warning shot’, Mom wd have burden of proof to show she actuallyfeared for life. Why/what would Mom fearif Dau was resident or guest? Maybe unexpectedly late time of arrival, IDK.

ALSO,
if Dau was not resident or invited guest {ß---MSM vague or conflicting on this, imo}
then per subsec(4), Dau is presumed to be in house w intent to commitan unlawful act involving force or violence.

FINALLY
if Dau attacked Mom before Mom fired {ß-No MSM mentn of Dau attack in MSM I've seen}, Mom may pleadSYG pre-trial. In pre-trial hearing FL judge rules on whether SYG can be usedat trial, and if allowed, jury decides whether SYG applies.
If Dau did not attack Mom before gunfire, pleaw SYG defense is not avail to Mom, imo.


Wondering if others agree or see itdifferently. Thx in adv.

IMO the mother believed the daughter to be an intruder. So if daughter is replaced by intruder then I think it does pass the castle doctrine/self defense test. I don't know what the law would go by. What the mother believed (intruder) or does it go by what the facts are after the shooting (daughter).

 

[al66pine]

IMO the mother believed the daughter to be an intruder. So if daughter is replaced by intruder then I think it does pass the castle doctrine/self defense test. I don't know what the law would go by. What the mother believed (intruder) or does it go by what the facts are after the shooting (daughter).

Whether Dau was a resident or invited guest (or lived elsewhere) is a major legal factor, imo, under FL law. Seems MSM gave conflicting info on that. No info whether Dau broke in.

If Dau was away (up in Carolinas?) for visit & "returned" does that mean to her Mom's house? Or could it mean Dau returned from out of town to St Cloud, went to her own apt/home, and maybe later to Mom's house? Or boyfriend's apt/home they shared (hypothetical bf)? IDK.
Was Dau expected as a visitor at Mom's house earlier that day, did not show? Or expected later? IDK.
Possibly a 'simple' family miscommunication about expected arrival time, IDK.

As I posted ^ at "FIRST" paragraph ~90 min ago, Mom may have legit C/D defense if Dau was not resident and if Dau broke in, imo. Any report on whether
- Mom's house door was locked/unlocked?
- Dau had key?

Hard to say. ^All JM2cts, could be wrong.

Maybe LE will release more info later.
Regardless of how it happened it is incredibly sad, sad, sad.

{ETA: seems Dau wd know Mom and/or Stepdad had guns in home, would know how to use them.}

 

[Sonya610]

What the mother believed (intruder) or does it go by what the facts are after the shooting (daughter).

In this case I think it would go by what the mother believed. If the DA wanted to charge her they would have to convince a jury that she either a) planned to kill her own daughter or b) acted in a reckless manner.

If all the DA has is what we have seen I don't see a jury convicting her, and I don't think the DA would even try. If they did try I could see the defense saying that the daughter takes some of the responsibility for not properly announcing herself when she arrived unexpectedly at night.

 

[fedfan4life]

This whole 'shoot now, ask questions later' mentality needs to stop.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[Donjeta]

The fact only one shot was fired backs up the "unintentional" story.

The likelihood of landing one "perfect" deadly shot with a .38 at a moving target in the dark is pretty much nil, even for the best shooters on the planet. Not a good murder plan.

Now if the mother fired a 12 gauge shotgun things would be different as one shot is pretty much guaranteed to be fatal at close range.

Well but if it was murder they could just say that it was dark even if it wasn't.

 

[jjenny]

IMO the mother believed the daughter to be an intruder. So if daughter is replaced by intruder then I think it does pass the castle doctrine/self defense test. I don't know what the law would go by. What the mother believed (intruder) or does it go by what the facts are after the shooting (daughter).

They have to go by what a reasonable person would do. If you ask me, it's not reasonable to shoot daughter in where daughter has a full right to be. But maybe that's just me.
So far we are told that this woman shot daughter, without even waking her husband (a cop).
Why didn't she ask who the supposed intruder was before shooting?
Why didn't she wake her husband (a cop) if she was so scared of the intruder?
Why didn't she tell 911 daughter was shot?
Is that reasonable behavior?

 

[ILOKAL]

They have to go by what a reasonable person would do. If you ask me, it's not reasonable to shoot daughter in where daughter has a full right to be. But maybe that's just me.
So far we are told that this woman shot daughter, without even waking her husband (a cop).
Why didn't she ask who the supposed intruder was before shooting?
Why didn't she wake her husband (a cop) if she was so scared of the intruder?
Why didn't she tell 911 daughter was shot?
Is that reasonable behavior?

The similar case in Las Vegas that I mentioned upthread, also involved someone who lived there (a mother) and a LE officer and her husband. They shot the would-be intruder a combined total of 27 times.

 

[Sonya610]

The similar case in Las Vegas that I mentioned upthread, also involved someone who lived there (a mother) and a LE officer and her husband. They shot the would-be intruder a combined total of 27 times.

Is there a thread on that case and if so can you link to it?

 

[SugarQueen]

Is there a thread on that case and if so can you link to it?

Here you go Sonya....http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...cidentally-shoots-relative-in-North-Las-Vegas

 

[Sonya610]

This whole 'shoot now, ask questions later' mentality needs to stop.

Responsible and prepared gun owners have preset game plans for situations like a possible intruder in the middle of the night. Waking up the spouse and identifying family members is a basic part of the plan unless someone lives alone (then identification isn't usually necessary).

This woman apparently had NO plan and just plain panicked. Since her husband is a LEO that makes it hard to believe they never discussed it.

I don't think she is covering up for the husband, most men wouldn't use a .38 as a home defense weapon, especially a cop.

 

[Sonya610]

The similar case in Las Vegas that I mentioned upthread, also involved someone who lived there (a mother) and a LE officer and her husband. They shot the would-be intruder a combined total of 27 times.

Just read the link. They shot *at* the relative 27 times and only hit the woman in the leg. But yes it shows how very unlucky the one shot from a .38 was in this case.

 

[bluesneakers]

Well but if it was murder they could just say that it was dark even if it wasn't.

You could say she didn't announce herself even if she did. You could say you weren't expecting when you knew she would be coming home at that time.

 

[killarney rose]

I was at home sick one day last spring. I was sleeping on the couch. I swore I heard what sounded like someone walking on the front porch. I immediately got up and loudly asked,"who's there?" No answer so I said, " I have a gun and I will use it!" I looked out the front window but didn't see anyone, so I guess I was hearing things or dreaming. But the point is, my first thought was to let the intruder know someone was home and I would shoot them.

 

[al66pine]

They have to go by what a reasonable person would do. If you ask me, it's not reasonable to shoot daughter in where daughter has a full right to be. But maybe that's just me....

^ snipped for focus "... where daughter has a full right to be ..."
Like you say ^, it's possible Dau had a right to be there as a resident, but MSM info I've seen is conflicting on that, imo. If Dau lived elsewhere (presumably in St Cloud area, an apt/home by herself, or w others), did not reside at that house, if she barged in totally unexpectedly, then she had no right to enter house, imo.

Possible catch - Mom may have given Dau a key, which she used to enter.
Does a key constitute an open invitation to visit any time, with or without notice or contact?
If Mom gave key to Dau to enter, does Mom then lose right to Castle Doctrine self defense? IDK.

Leading me back to other possibility that Mom & Dau has miscommunication about arrival time, that Dau arrived either unexpectedly late or early, so Mom was not expecting her and used gun.


Just interpreting incomplete info differently; opn subject to change w more info.

 

[jjenny]

Just read the link. They shot *at* the relative 27 times and only hit the woman in the leg. But yes it shows how very unlucky the one shot from a .38 was in this case.

I don't think it has anything to do with luck. Mother obviously keeps a gun in her bedroom (presumably loaded). So presumably she is a good shot. She could be practicing day in and day out on gun ranges for all you know. One shot in the center mass is all it takes. It's not that hard to shoot a target. First time I shot a weapon I hit a target without having any practice prior.

 

[al66pine]

This whole 'shoot now, ask questions later' mentality needs to stop.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

I understand what you are saying ^ but it's possible Mom's firing gun in own home at noise she thought was intruder is a justified shooting. Say, if Dau living elsewhere & Mom had not communicated about if/when Dau would come to house. IDK, saying possible, imo.

There are multiple unknowns, but imo, seems Dau would have known about guns in the house, that Mom & Stepdad knew how to use them, and would willing to shoot a perceived intruder. Is it outside the realm of possibility that Mom & Stepdad had talked w Dau - w his being UC LEO that when home at night, they were on 'red alert' recently or even all the time?

Not a situation where homeowner hearing noise outside, goes out to investigate, and shoots at unidentified person. MSM said Dau was inside. Generally in Castle Doctrine states, residents in their homes are justified in using force or shooting perceived intruders, but there may be a factor or two rendering CD defense not applicable. IDK.


JM2cts, open to changing mind when more info is avail.

 

[jjenny]

Daughter lives in the same house. So daughter had a right to be in the house, she wasn't intruding.

"– where 27-year-old Doby lived with her mother..."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...y-fatal-shooting-st-cloud-20151231-story.html

 

[jjenny]

The first responders, medics, and LE were all witnesses to the scene and from what they saw, it matches what the mother said happened. IMO

Did any of them see the shooting? I think not. Mother admitted she shot her daughter. So the evidence would match that. What does that prove?

 

[Steft50]

I don't see anything sinister in the way the 911 call was reported. Saint Cloud is a small town. This man is an undercover police officer. I do believe he was trying to get medical care there as quickly as possible while also trying to protect his identity from the media and public. IMO, this being Saint Cloud if he had it in as a gun shooting announced over the scanner there would of been media and others showing up. Reporting it as someone collapsing from a heart condition gets medical help there just as quickly, IMO, and helped to conceal his undercover identity.

Honestly I think your wife shooting your step daughter while you are also in the house negates whatever undercover op he was on the second that gun is fired and that bullet hits someone.