FL - Sara Morales, 35, shot dead by motorcyclist she hit with car, Orange City, 20 Nov 2021

[PremeditatedCrime]

An inconclusive pregnancy result makes me wonder if she had recently miscarried but hadn’t revealed that to her mother yet. The mother thinks she is pregnant at that point. But if the ME can’t confirm it, it was either too early or too late. Unless there’s some medical condition that I’m unaware of that would produce an inconclusive result.

I am pretty sure that a miscarriage would show up easily during medical tests. I will have to double check this information and get back to you.

 

[Cryptic]

Had they called LE vs confront the woman, no one would be dead. At minimum, this appears to be manslaughter, IMO.

amateur opinion and speculation

Going amateur philosophical..... Your line of thought was supported by our Common Law tradition:

- People did something that they did not truly need to to do (followed woman home after minor accident). Thus, were arguably looking for trouble. Avoidable violent confrontation occurs

- Yes, deceased contributed to confrontation, but cant be punished. Societal interest in discouraging avoidable violence. So, Manslaughter charges for the shooter.

But..... Common law concepts have faded out of our legal thought over the past few generations. Today, we are almost entirely "Roman Law".

Roman law is near totally centered on: Was the action legal yes / no? . If legal, then it cant be applied against them. Following her was perfectly legal. Thus, a lot harder to punish them for "spin offs".

In short...... My bet is that they would have been prosecuted in previous generations, but will not be prosecuted today.

As a further side note, Common Law concepts had their strengths, but as they were concepts and not truly written down could be misused. What could be "looking for trouble" for one person could change into "making an honest inquiry" when applied to somebody else (librarian follows bikers).

 

[rosesfromangels]

Going amateur philosophical..... Your line of thought was supported by our Common Law tradition:

- People did something that they did not truly need to to do (followed woman home after minor accident). Thus, were arguably looking for trouble. Avoidable violent confrontation occurs

- Yes, deceased contributed to confrontation, but cant be punished. Societal interest in discouraging avoidable violence. So, Manslaughter charges for the shooter.

But..... Common law concepts have faded out of our legal thought over the past few generations. Today, we are almost entirely "Roman Law".

Roman law is near totally centered on: Was the action legal yes / no? . If legal, then it cant be applied against them. Following her was perfectly legal. Thus, a lot harder to punish them for "spin offs".

In short...... My bet is that they would have been prosecuted in previous generations, but will not be prosecuted today.

As a further side note, Common Law concepts had their strengths, but as they were concepts and not truly written down could be misused. What could be "looking for trouble" for one person could change into "making an honest inquiry" when applied to somebody else (librarian follows bikers).

Interesting. Thank you for sharing this, a lot to ponder there.

It's sad all around. I can understand both sides of this story, but as it turns out we have a dead librarian and her unborn child, and still living bikers who followed her to her home. They could/should have gotten her license plate, called LE, and we'd still have a live librarian and unborn child. I think it's a very powerful lesson to all in that in the heat of the moment....it's always best to cool off and step back until we can think things through.

Such a sad and avoidable tragedy. If the biker(s) in question don't pay a price criminally, there is a high probability (IMO) that they will pay civilly for wrongful death.

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[MsMarple]

Just found this case. Is that his motorcycle in the background of the video? Cannot have been much (if any) damage if he drove it to her house. Did the bike even drop when it was allegedly hit? Why didn’t he just get her license plate number, then call the police to report the incident? If SM and AD were truly strangers to one another, and there’s not more to this story, his story stinks.

Yeah, this case is odd IMO. One question I had has been answered - the motorcycle on the porch belonged to SM's boyfriend. Coincidence?

But what really struck me as odd is that according to the witness in the 911 call (posted at the bottom link) neither AD nor his motorcycle was damaged. In the call the dispatcher specifically asked if the motorcyclist was hurt and the caller said "No, he's fine." A bit later the dispatcher asks the caller if the motorcycle was damaged - she asked if it was lying on the ground - and the caller said "No, it's fine."

So why the heck would AD and 2 other apparent witnesses feel it necessary to follow SM? Okay, so AD was pissed about SM leaving. But the witnesses? Strangers to both parties as I understand it. Who bothers to chase after a woman in such circumstances? If they had her tag number and could describe her to LE then what was the point?

Something is definitely off. Hopefully a full investigation is being conducted.

Hit-and-run driver shot, killed in confrontation after Orange City crash, police say

 

[rosesfromangels]

Yeah, this case is odd IMO. One question I had has been answered - the motorcycle on the porch belonged to SM's boyfriend. Coincidence?

But what really struck me as odd is that according to the witness in the 911 call (posted at the bottom link) neither AD nor his motorcycle was damaged. In the call the dispatcher specifically asked if the motorcyclist was hurt and the caller said "No, he's fine." A bit later the dispatcher asks the caller if the motorcycle was damaged - she asked if it was lying on the ground - and the caller said "No, it's fine."

So why the heck would AD and 2 other apparent witnesses feel it necessary to follow SM? Okay, so AD was pissed about SM leaving. But the witnesses? Strangers to both parties as I understand it. Who bothers to chase after a woman in such circumstances? If they had her tag number and could describe her to LE then what was the point?

Something is definitely off. Hopefully a full investigation is being conducted.

Hit-and-run driver shot, killed in confrontation after Orange City crash, police say

He was in road rage, and the other two took chase in “biker solidarity”. Speculation.

amateur opinion and speculation

 

[SuziQ]

TWO counts of manslaughter/murder -- Ms. Morales and the baby she carried. Or ONE count of manslaughter and ONE count of murder of the baby.

BTW who shoots a pregnant woman??? Who does that?

(Unless perhaps that shooter has a problem with the baby's father, perhaps???)

jmho ymmv lrr

Did they know she was pregnant?

 

[rosesfromangels]

Did they know she was pregnant?

Unknown at this time

 

[SuziQ]

Interesting. Thank you for sharing this, a lot to ponder there.

It's sad all around. I can understand both sides of this story, but as it turns out we have a dead librarian and her unborn child, and still living bikers who followed her to her home. They could/should have gotten her license plate, called LE, and we'd still have a live librarian and unborn child. I think it's a very powerful lesson to all in that in the heat of the moment....it's always best to cool off and step back until we can think things through.

Such a sad and avoidable tragedy. If the biker(s) in question don't pay a price criminally, there is a high probability (IMO) that they will pay civilly for wrongful death.

Amateur opinion and speculation

Another lesson is pull a gun on someone, expect to be shot at.

Moo.

 

[Cryptic]

One question I had has been answered - the motorcycle on the porch belonged to SM's boyfriend. Coincidence?

Okay, so AD was pissed about SM leaving. But the witnesses? Strangers to both parties as I understand it. Who bothers to chase after a woman in such circumstances?

He was in road rage, and the other two took chase in “biker solidarity”.

I agree that it could be an example of biker brotherdom. A certain number of bikers do view themselves as part of a large, informal fraternity.

At the same time, as MsMarple illustrates, there seems to be alot of coincidences: The bf of the deceased owns a bike, she road rages at.... a biker. Two other bikers not only happen to be in the immediate vicinity, but they also actively join a chase despite the whole encounter being minor and not knowing the shooter.....

The totality could be a "Coincidence too Far"- similar to the Bridge too Far / Arnhem battle in WWII where an allied victory in each individual sub battle was very possible - but the totality risked things breaking down for them.

Even the biker brotherhood concept that supports the two bikers helping a brother biker give chase on impulse also supports the possibility that the deceased / bike owning BF had contact with the other bikers at a themed event or watering hole in the past.

 

[rosesfromangels]

Another lesson is pull a gun on someone, expect to be shot at.
Moo.

I agree with your statement. In this case, I do think the woman likely thought she was in mortal danger and took the action she did. Terribly sad all around.

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[tara83]

So they claimed she tried to run him over on purpose but he was fine and his motorcycle was also fine?Yep this story stinks.

 

[MaryFairy]

Another lesson is pull a gun on someone, expect to be shot at.

Moo.

What happened to the Castle Doctrine? Are we back in the Wild West where the quickest draw wins?

 

[evilwise]

What happened to the Castle Doctrine? Are we back in the Wild West where the quickest draw wins?

Florida's castle doctrine only extends to a person's front door. The law wants for her to remain in her home. The bikers' argument hints on Florida's stand your ground law, which requires them to have been in a place they were legally allowed to be. If Sara ordered them off her property then they were not legally allowed to be there.

All this stuff becomes confusing because we live in a time when everybody thinks they have all the rights all the time.

Ideally the law wants for there to be a door between you and the threat, which crazily enough is also the most logical, tactical way to handle it as well. If someone is trying to break into your house then not only is the law clear but it is also simply much easier for you to shoot them than it is for them to shoot you.

However, in this case if I were a prosecutor (or a judge or a jury member) the clear implication is that Sara went out on her porch with her gun to order these dudes off her property and I would need to be convinced otherwise. Maybe they were familiar with the law though, went as far as the street and she continued to argue and brandish the weapon.

Maybe that's why it's taking so long. Forensic investigators may be painstakingly trying to conclusively establish exactly where the shot was fired from.

 

[PremeditatedCrime]

Florida's castle doctrine only extends to a person's front door. The law wants for her to remain in her home. The bikers' argument hints on Florida's stand your ground law, which requires them to have been in a place they were legally allowed to be. If Sara ordered them off her property then they were not legally allowed to be there.

All this stuff becomes confusing because we live in a time when everybody thinks they have all the rights all the time.

Ideally the law wants for there to be a door between you and the threat, which crazily enough is also the most logical, tactical way to handle it as well. If someone is trying to break into your house then not only is the law clear but it is also simply much easier for you to shoot them than it is for them to shoot you.

However, in this case if I were a prosecutor (or a judge or a jury member) the clear implication is that Sara went out on her porch with her gun to order these dudes off her property and I would need to be convinced otherwise. Maybe they were familiar with the law though, went as far as the street and she continued to argue and brandish the weapon.

Maybe that's why it's taking so long. Forensic investigators may be painstakingly trying to conclusively establish exactly where the shot was fired from.

That's incorrect. As per Sara's 911 call, she exited her car rather than the house. Sara never made it inside the house. Sara couldn't remain in the car with the doors locked because her mother was outside and panicking, plus her daughter was alone in the house. Also, it's reasonable to assume that at least one of the male stalkers would have gotten inside the house or car.

Not so sure if Castle Doctrine is necessary here. It's common sense that three men stalking a woman driving alone presents a serious threat to the woman's safety. Plus as per Sara's 911 call, she had already told them on the road to back off.

I would post Sara's 911 call but it was removed by moderators because it originated on YouTube rather than MSM.

By the way, the male stalkers made two 911 calls. In the first, it illustrates that the men already had Sara's license plate number BEFORE they started following her, as per the first call. In the second, it suggests premeditation because the male witness knew EXACTLY what to tell the 911 Dispatcher, just one or two seconds after Sara was shot multiple times. Also, Derr did not immediately drop his gun. This resulted in an active shooter situation, and therefore there was a delay in transporting Sara to medical facilities. Listen carefully to the second 911 call: Derr does not drop his weapon.

I can re-post the men's 911 calls if you want, since they were published on MSM.

Again, not so sure if Castle Doctrine is necessary, since it's common sense and more than reasonable that any woman driving alone and stalked by three men is in imminent danger.

Again, Sara never made it to her house.

 

[MsMarple]

The officer and a colleague continue approaching, asking Derr for his first name. As they get closer, he tells them that Morales tried to kill him.

“OK, all right, just relax,” the officer responds.

“I’m so sorry,” Derr tells them.

He continues apologizing as two officers place him in handcuffs.

“She tried to kill me. And those other people, I think they had guns, too,” he says.
Pregnant Florida library worker killed after pulling gun on biker she intentionally hit with car

Who did AD mean by "other people?"

Watching the video of police approaching the scene it looks like AD's motorcycle was either on the road or a bit up the driveway of SM's house. He was told to lie down on what appears to be the road.
Watch: Bodycam shows tense moments after library assistant was shot in road rage incident

Did he and/or the witnesses actually go up the driveway to the house to confront SM or did she approach them? I'm still a little confused.

 

[PremeditatedCrime]

Florida's castle doctrine only extends to a person's front door. The law wants for her to remain in her home. The bikers' argument hints on Florida's stand your ground law, which requires them to have been in a place they were legally allowed to be. If Sara ordered them off her property then they were not legally allowed to be there.

All this stuff becomes confusing because we live in a time when everybody thinks they have all the rights all the time.

Ideally the law wants for there to be a door between you and the threat, which crazily enough is also the most logical, tactical way to handle it as well. If someone is trying to break into your house then not only is the law clear but it is also simply much easier for you to shoot them than it is for them to shoot you.

However, in this case if I were a prosecutor (or a judge or a jury member) the clear implication is that Sara went out on her porch with her gun to order these dudes off her property and I would need to be convinced otherwise. Maybe they were familiar with the law though, went as far as the street and she continued to argue and brandish the weapon.

Maybe that's why it's taking so long. Forensic investigators may be painstakingly trying to conclusively establish exactly where the shot was fired from.

Sara never left the safety of her house. She never made it to her house. She had exited her CAR, couldn't stay in the CAR because her mother was outside and in panic, plus her daughter was alone in the house. And it's more than reasonable to assume that at least one of the male stalkers would have gotten inside the car or house.

Had Sara been a man, she'd be considered a hero.

 

[MaryFairy]

And the civilised rest of the world do not use that a woman had caused minor (if any) damage to a vehicle as an excuse for men to chase her and occupy her driveway and then shoot her. It is unbelievable to the civilised world.

 

[steeltowngirl]

Another lesson is pull a gun on someone, expect to be shot at.

Moo.

The lesson I took away from this tragedy is do not warn someone you have a gun or point it to scare them away. As a last resort, only draw if you intend to shoot immediately, point the gun, and pull the trigger.

Had Sara done so, she might be alive to tell us what really happened. But she cannot. And perhaps that’s the point.

jmo

 

[darring21]

The lesson I took away from this tragedy is do not warn someone you have a gun or point it to scare them away. As a last resort, only draw if you intend to shoot immediately, point the gun, and pull the trigger.

Had Sara done so, she might be alive to tell us what really happened. But she cannot. And perhaps that’s the point.

jmo

I think this is only true in stand your ground states. In my state, she could have pulled her gun and told them to get off her property, but she still had a duty to retreat. She could not have just shot someone for trespassing. If they had pulled their gun, then she could have shot. IMO, the stand your ground law can be troubling.

 

[steeltowngirl]

I think this is only true in stand your ground states. In my state, she could have pulled her gun and told them to get off her property, but she still had a duty to retreat. She could not have just shot someone for trespassing. If they had pulled their gun, then she could have shot. IMO, the stand your ground law can be troubling.

Understood. One of the troubling parts of this case is not knowing at what point Sara became aware that AD was armed. Was it back on the roadway at the scene of the alleged road rage / intentional hit / accident? Sara and AD engaged in some type of conversation at the initial scene. Did she leave the scene in an attempt to escape a threat? Why did he chase her? Why did he not have a duty to retreat when he was told to leave her property?

There are more questions than answers, and since LE stated that SM was the aggressor, and they are now silent, we may never know more.