Murder or Castle Doctrine?

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

A case not too far from my hometown.

STEELVILLE, Mo. — James Crocker had grown weary of the partying canoeists and rafters who encroached on his neatly kept property along Missouri's Meramec River. When he caught a man about to relieve himself on a gravel bar by his yard last month, a nasty confrontation ensued that ended with one person dead and Crocker accused of killing him.

Crocker's attorney, Michael Bert of St. Louis, said that Crocker was defending himself and his property.

"Here's a man in fear for his life and fearful he might suffer bodily injury," Bert said.

Uh, yeah.

Crocker, a 59-year-old plastics plant worker with long hair and a thick goatee, lives in a small white frame home on a shaded gravel road about eight miles west of Steelville, the self-proclaimed floating capital of the world.

Let's face it, everyone knew he was going to shoot someone in the face eventually.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Let's face it, everyone knew he was going to shoot someone in the face eventually.

Has not killed anyone yet...

[Dave Lane]

Based on appearances alone I would convict after seeing that picture.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

Based on appearances alone I would convict after seeing that picture.

They may have thrown rocks because they thought he was an attacking sasquatch.

[tooge]

I canoe the rivers of southern MO a couple of times a summer. I've got my son with me, and we are fishing, so were pretty tame as floaters go. We do stop on sand bars all along the river to fish from them, eat lunch, or swim a bit. I've only once had a man come down and tell me that technically, I was on his land, but he didn't care.

I'm guessing the story lies somewhere in the middle, but it'll be a he said/he said type of thing where only the people there will really know what happened.

If a guy starts shooting at my friends and I, I'm not picking up rocks and throwing them at him, I'm running my ass away in a serpentine path.

I'll bet the drunk floaters didn't want to be told that they can't be there, argued, it escalated, stones got thrown, and he shot at them.

I'd probably acquit him based on the story above.

[Dave Lane]

Stupidest comment in history. Yeah they started mouthing off and throwing rocks at a guy with a 9mm pistol. Yeah thats bound to be true.

Look at his picture there's literally no way he wasn't at fault.

Originally Posted by tooge

I canoe the rivers of southern MO a couple of times a summer. I've got my son with me, and we are fishing, so were pretty tame as floaters go. We do stop on sand bars all along the river to fish from them, eat lunch, or swim a bit. I've only once had a man come down and tell me that technically, I was on his land, but he didn't care.

I'm guessing the story lies somewhere in the middle, but it'll be a he said/he said type of thing where only the people there will really know what happened.

If a guy starts shooting at my friends and I, I'm not picking up rocks and throwing them at him, I'm running my ass away in a serpentine path.

I'll bet the drunk floaters didn't want to be told that they can't be there, argued, it escalated, stones got thrown, and he shot at them.

I'd probably acquit him based on the story above.

[tooge]

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

Stupidest comment in history. Yeah they started mouthing off and throwing rocks at a guy with a 9mm pistol. Yeah thats bound to be true.

Look at his picture there's literally no way he wasn't at fault.

First off, go **** yourself. Secondly, the guy probably wasn't brandishing his weapon as he went down there. Finally, have you ever been away from your stargazing and Jesus bashing long enough to go to one of these rivers? The canoeists on the river are complete idiots half of the time. They leave their beer cans, flip flops, clothing, baggies, etc., all over the river and its banks. Most of them are highly inebriated, foul mouthed, and doing things that are illegal (showing tits, smoking weed). There is no way they stood there throwing rocks at a guy with a gun. No chance.

Was it right to shoot them? No. He should have walked back up the hill to his house and called the cops, but if they were throwing rocks at him, or simply wouldn't leave his property when asked, then they broke the law, not him. I think by the letter of the law, he could have shot more of them until they left his property.

[Graystoke]

Gun vs. Rocks.
Gun win!
Who knew?

[Rain Man]

This is really a tough case. I'm glad I'm not on the jury.

If you're a landowner, it's got to be extremely frustrating when drunk people are repeatedly coming onto your property and messing it up. And after a moment's thought, I see the point where you should be able to take a gun with you to fend off trespassers.

But it seems like there should've been a better solution than shooting a guy. The odds that he was coming onto your property to intentionally cause harm is quite low.

You can't really fence off the property. He had signs posted, and that didn't work. You can't booby trap the place. Maybe you could install a water cannon or something, but that would undoubtedly cause escalation. The only thing I can think of is to inform them that you're videoing the area and will show their small genitalia on the Internet.

I initially thought this guy has to get convicted, but the more I think about it, self-defense could be a quite viable defense.

The real problem here is people getting drunk and not respecting property. If you could enforce that, you wouldn't have this problem. But there's not anywhere near the law enforcement manpower you'd need to enforce public drunkenness on the river in that part of the state.

[trndobrd]

First, the reporter completely misrepresents the Missouri Castle Doctrine law. It does NOT "allow the use of deadly force to defend property." It makes clear that a person does not have to retreat from a "dwelling, residence or vehicle" if they believe physical force is required to protect himself.* Basically, it provides a protection against prosecution based on the theory that you should have tried to escape from your home instead of shooting the robber. There is no 'Castle Doctrine" defense in this case.

Second, as DJ mentioned, this is just a plain old self defense case. Would a 'reasonable person' have felt a threat of death or severe bodily harm by a couple drunk Yahoos throwing rocks?





2. A person may not use deadly force upon another person under the circumstances specified in subsection 1 of this section unless:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such deadly force is necessary to protect himself or herself or another against death, serious physical injury,[ rape, sodomy or kidnapping or serious physical injury through robbery, burglary or arson] or any forcible felony; or

(2) Such force is used against a person who unlawfully enters, remains after unlawfully entering, or attempts to unlawfully enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle lawfully occupied by such person.

3. A person does not have a duty to retreat from a dwelling, residence, or vehicle where the person is not unlawfully entering or unlawfully remaining.

[Ming the Merciless]

One side note in looking at the federal law....it seems the FLoaters do have the right to use gravel bars and the banks of the river.....as an easement...as long as they dont try and travel onto the guy's property. But they DO seem to have a right to use the gravel banks etc as they travel down the river.

Whether they should get violent and throw rocks / confront the property owner while doing so is another issue....

[Iowanian]

I'm all for property rights for the land owner, but you can't shoot someone for taking a piss.

The behavior of too many floaters is ruining it for most, especially families. We used to go every year as a kid, but I'm not interested in subjecting my kids to the behavior on those rivers the past several years.

[Radar Chief]

Originally Posted by Iowanian

I'm all for property rights for the land owner, but you can't shoot someone for taking a piss.

The behavior of too many floaters is ruining it for most, especially families. We used to go every year as a kid, but I'm not interested in subjecting my kids to the behavior on those rivers the past several years.

Last time we floated the Elk River near Noel, MO they were trying to clean that up, handing out hefty fines for drug use, exposing yourself.

[tooge]

Like I said, in 30 years of floating several of the rivers of Missouri, including the Meremac, I've only been aproached by a landowner once, and the guy was totally cool because we were just standing there fishing. Often times, the floaters have very loud music, are swearing like sailors, and are drunk as shit. I'm not saying what the guy did was right, but I'm sort of surprised it took this long for it to happen.

[Dayze]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

A 2012 Texas A&M University study found that homicides ruled justifiable rose by 8 percent in states with "stand-your-ground laws.
.

well, duh. I'm not saying the guy in case was in the right, but I'm sure the rise in homicides was due to scumbags being in a place where they shouldn't have been, or were intentionally aggressive towards the person with the firearm.