17 year old Summer Moody has died. Her assailant is now known, but still not charged.

[pnwmom]

Last edited Thu Apr 26, 2012, 12:48 PM - Edit history (1)

This is the case where a group of campers in a fishing cabin heard noises at 4 am and decided to grab their rifles and get in a boat and investigate the noises. The authorities have determined which of the "campers" who fired "warning shots" into the darkness at a group of scattering teens hit Summer Moody in the back of the head, but no shooter has yet been charged. The only current charges are against the teens who were with Summer, who the campers claimed had been involved in a burglary at the unoccupied cabin. The prosecutor is still determining whether the shooting was justified, as the shooters say they simply were trying to protect another camper's property.

And in Alabama, a lot of people think if someone MIGHT be vandalizing or stealing someone else's property, it's okay if you fire "warning shots" that accidentally hit a human being -- even if you have a previous conviction for cocaine trafficking yourself, and probably shouldn't be carrying a gun anyway.

The Feds are also investigating now, because of this gun regulation issue, but they say that they don't press charges in all such situations -- it could depend on whether this shooting turned out to be justified.

Whether this shooting -- of an unarmed girl in the back of the head -- turned out to be justified.

Wow. One more reason I'm glad I don't live in Alabama.

http://www2.wkrg.com/news/2012/apr/26/7/summer-moody-dies-ar-3678671/


Robert Stankoski, the Moody family's attorney, says she passed away shortly after 10 p.m. Wednesday when her parents "made the very difficult and traumatic decision to remove her from the ventilator." An infection at the site of the bullet wound had moved to Moody's brain. Surgery to remove the infected portion of the brain would have effected her cognitive function.

[DonP]

1. Odd, you left out the part where the "teens" were arrested and charged with aggravated burglary...

... for forcibly breaking into several cabins, and being found with both stolen property and a rifle by the police.

But I guess that doesn't make it as sympathetic of a story, does it?

Sorry to hear the girl has passed away, now the question is will her "friends" that she was partying with, after she lied to her parents about where she was, be charged with Felony murder for her death?

[snooper2]

3. Wonder if the OP will respond to this reply...

[MattBaggins]

12. I hope not. It does not merit a reply.

[frylock]

16. no shit

unfuckinbelievable

[Egalitarian Thug]

184. Took the word right out of my mouth. n/t

[pnwmom]

36. I did. nt

[joeybee12]

4. And yet the criminal records of those who shot her and shot at the kids

Doesn't sway you at all, huh? Just take the police's account at face value, right? Not a case of a bunch of gun-toting good old boys being assholes and the police helping to cover it up, right? Tell me about Summer's extensive criminal record...oh, that's right, she doesn't have one...yet the story concoted by the police rings true to you, huh?

[obamanut2012]

48. I didn't think convicted drug felons were allowed to own guns

Even long guns. Is that not a Federal law?

[pnwmom]

69. That's why the Feds are now investigating. Apparently there are some exceptions,

so it isn't an open and shut case.

[obamanut2012]

76. Should have read further -- thanks!

[Go Vols]

116. .

Some states will wipe a felony off your record after X amount of years of "being a good citizen".

[obamanut2012]

156. That wouldn't affect the Federal reg on this

[Swede]

6. Odd that you feel it's ok to protect property over a human life.

nt

[Snake Alchemist]

9. If a burglar was in your house what would you do.

My last burglars killed my cat. I would love to end their human lives. Slowly.

[Swede]

14. Home invasion is a different thing,your life is in danger,not your property.

nt

[Snake Alchemist]

21. What if someone came home to a burglary?

How would a neighbor know if you were home if they witnessed a burglary? I'd prefer they shot the burglars if they saw it in progress. No warning shots though.

[Swede]

30. Property is not worth it.

Call the cops.

[Snake Alchemist]

33. Cops take time. The last burglars killed my cat without a thought.

The idea that these burglars are some sort of honorable people is just laughable. Besides killing my cat they took mementos that I can never replace. My neighbor witnessed the whole thing last time and did nothing. Now I have cameras installed so if anyone tries it again they are leaving horizontally.

[Swede]

43. Oh,you're one of those guys with a hardon for shooting someone.

Sorry.

[Snake Alchemist]

57. Yeah, that's what it is. Call me when your 16 yo pet is killed. nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

62. You don't value human life. That's a real problem

[Snake Alchemist]

66. No. I don't value a burglar's life over my pets. nt

[kwassa]

113. If you took a human life over the loss of a pet ....

you should spend a very long time in jail.

[Snake Alchemist]

117. I would take multiple human lives if it meant saving any of my pets.

I would have shot Michael Vick if I saw him body-slamming pit bulls too.

[Comrade Grumpy]

120. Seek help. You're displaying some seriously fucked up values.

Understandable, I suppose, but also kind of insane.

[Snake Alchemist]

122. Because I value my pets over a life of a burglar? Sorry, your the one with messed up values. nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

127. I'm not the one advocating killing multiple people over a pet.

If I hear someone say that in a bar or restaurant, I'd get the hell out of there, because that's one seriously warped person with some real anger issues. Probably got guns, too. The kind of person who one day becomes the subject of contentious DU threads.

[Snake Alchemist]

135. That kind of babble you are spouting is usually followed by "God gave man dominion over the animals"

Sorry, sometimes pets are part of the family.

[Comrade Grumpy]

138. Tell it to the judge. I'll leave it at that.

[Snake Alchemist]

140. If a dog attacked a burglar, what would you like to see happen? nt

[Life Long Dem]

165. Tell the cops that.

Officer? "I value my pets over the life of a burglar, so I killed them."

[RebelOne]

148. I agree with you.

If a burglar broke into my house and shot one of my dogs, I would shoot the SOB.

[Snake Alchemist]

150. Thank you for restoring some of my faith in people.

My dogs and even that dog that purrs are part of my family and subject to the same protections.

[Comrade Grumpy]

119. Are you going to shoot them with your cameras?

In most places, I don't think your neighbor can legally shoot your burglar. Unless it's Houston.

[Snake Alchemist]

121. No, but my office is about 5 minutes from my house.

Alarm has gone off several times, but I always beat the cops by 20 minutes.

I would settle for them just calling the police.

[naaman fletcher]

175. If you don't want to get shot

don't break into people's houses. Seems pretty simple to me.

[Swede]

177. What if it was your kid?

Kids do stupid things.

[naaman fletcher]

178. Kids do stupid things

Breaking and entering is not a stupid thing.

[Swede]

180. A bunch of teenagers out drinking break into an empty fishing hut is not stupid?

What is it then?

[naaman fletcher]

182. Yes I agree

My original comment was not germane to this case but rather a response to the idea that it is never ok to kill over property.

[pnwmom]

70. You'd prefer if your neighbor shot at people they didn't know coming out of your house?

What if the people coming out of your house happened to be your relatives, who you'd asked to get something for you?

[Snake Alchemist]

75. I'd like to think people can tell the difference.

Of course I would not want them to go blasting away! I would at least hope they'd ask questions. Last time a white beat up van pulled into my driveway and several men took out everything of value. My neighbors watched and they know me and my usual schedule! They just couldn't be bothered to get involved.

[pnwmom]

93. What your neighbors should have done is call 911, if they saw anything suspicious.

If a neighbor truly was worried s/he was watching a burglary in progress, I wouldn't want the neighbor to confront any burglar personally.

[Snake Alchemist]

106. That would have been nice. nt

[TheMadMonk]

103. Tell that to Trayvon's family. <DEEP FUCKING BREATHS>

[Snake Alchemist]

104. They probably would have liked for someone to get involved as well. nt

[TheMadMonk]

131. Someone did INVOLVE himself. In almost exactly the same manner...

...as the fucktards you've been so ausiduously defending.

Someone, took it upon themselves to use deadly force, in a situation where deadly force was neither warranted, nor legally permissible.

And, just like Zimmerman's defenders, you've done your fucking damnedest to blame the victim.

[Snake Alchemist]

132. They probably would have liked one of the onlookers to get involved. nt

[LanternWaste]

137. keep adding the post-hoc qualifiers until it fits the narrative you're looking for...

Odd that you keep adding the post-hoc qualifiers until it fits the narrative you're looking for...well, maybe not odd

[Snake Alchemist]

139. So you're saying that they would have not have liked someone not involved in the confrontation to

get involved? I have my doubts.

[TheMadMonk]

101. What if the angle of impact is exactly right to strangle you with your seatbelt.

What if your head might have fitted between two whatevers but your helmet wouldn't?

1) Sod off with fictitious might have beens.

2) You have a LIMITED right (under some jurisdictions) to use deadly force in the protection of YOUR OWN PROPERTY.

You have NO FUCKING RIGHT WHATSOVEVER to use deadly force in protecting the property of others.

[Snake Alchemist]

102. Bunch of nonsense. If I come to my elderly parents home and there is a burglary in progress I am

not going to wait until I confirm their whereabouts before taking action. I would first take verbal action and if that didn't work, other action would be taken, possibly deadly.

[TheMadMonk]

123. Family is a long fucking way from a part time neighbour.

And if you went in with guns blazing without a credible belief that your parents were present, and surprise surprise they weren't, you'd be fucked.

[Snake Alchemist]

124. "You have NO FUCKING RIGHT WHATSOVEVER to use deadly force in protecting the property of others."

Unless it's a relative?

And that's why I said that no one should go in with guns ablaze.

[pnwmom]

128. There was NO BURGLARY IN PROGRESS and the cabin was empty.

The teens were 15-30 feet away from the cabin when they were spotted, and none of the campers even reported that they could see the teens carrying anything.

IF a burglary occurred, it occurred prior to the campers' arrival, and the teens were "scattering" when the campers arrived. No burglary was in progress.

[Snake Alchemist]

134. Where is that from?

Either the fishermen got very lucky with their suspicions or they should be detectives.

[pnwmom]

144. Here are a couple of relevant articles.

The fishermen weren't "lucky." They were suspicious because there had recently been other burglaries on the island.

Dassinger, who is quoted below, is the attorney for one of the adult fishermen. It isn't clear yet which one of them shot Summer Moody.


http://blog.al.com/live/2012/04/attorney_describes_gravine_isl.html

Dassinger said the couples were asleep in their camp house when the generator malfunctioned shutting off the air conditioning.

"Someone got up to fix it, and it happened again so things were quiet while they were working on it and someone heard a boat motor. Later they heard crashes and people talking. So eventually the men got in a boat and went over."

He said the 3 had a spotlight, a .22 rifle and a .17 rifle. When they shined the light toward the camp where the noises were coming from, "they saw what they thought were grown men that turned out to be teenagers."


The campers yelled at the teens to stop and then fired two warning shots as they scattered "to get them to stop" so the campers could call authorities. The campers then returned to their boat and headed away only to hear a young man screaming for help.

http://www.gulfcoastnewstoday.com/area_news/county_government/article_60ba2524-8d58-11e1-a82b-0019bb2963f4.html

Baldwin County Sheriff Huey “Hoss” Mack said noise at 4 a.m. prompted two of the three men in the camp to fired rifles in the darkness at the intruders. One shot hit Moody in the head. She was 15- to 30-feet from the dwelling.

[Snake Alchemist]

146. I see where the girl was 15 - 30 feet away, but what about the others?

I think the guy who fired the warning shot should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law (because you NEVER do that). I also think the burglars should be prosecuted.

[pnwmom]

154. I haven't seen that. But all the accounts I've read

put the teens outside of the building when the fishermen, who were also outside of the building, fired their "warning shots." And in no account did the fishermen's lawyer or the Sheriff say that the fishermen actually witnessed anyone in the act of burglary.

If there is evidence -- beyond the shooting fishermen's say-so -- that the boys were burglarizing, sure, they should be prosecuted. But remember, the fishermen said that there have been prior burglaries, so any evidence (broken doors, or whatever) would have to be linked to the boys -- not some previous burglars. Hopefully there will be fingerprints or shoe prints or something that will help identify if the boys were involved in a burglary.

Also, don't forget that the fishermen themselves have criminal records, which affects their credibility and their right to be carrying guns in the first place. I'm glad that the Feds are investigating this.

[Spoonman]

136. 15-30 feet away......

Ever hear of the 21 foot rule?

[Spoonman]

129. "You have NO FUCKING RIGHT WHATSOVEVER to use deadly force in protecting the property of others."

Joe Horn and the Harris County grand jury would disagree with you on that.

Thank heavens you have NOTHING to do with establishing laws that affect me.

My neighbors are my best friends, there children are like my own.

[pnwmom]

170. The cabin was under construction and no neighbors or kids were ever at risk

except for the ones that got shot by the trigger-happy gunmen.

[Spoonman]

174. OK, so stealing from a house under construction is no longer a crime.

Really!?

[pnwmom]

179. Stealing some tools from anywhere shouldn't justify a death sentence.

But where did I say that burglary wasn't a crime? If the teens were involved in burglary, then there should be consequences. (There hasn't yet been a trial, of course, so no one knows whether the teens were actually burglarizing the cabin or not. I certainly wouldn't take the word of the fishermen with the cocaine convictions.)

Why will there will be no consequences for these adult men who recklessly shot bullets into the dark? Why aren't you outraged about that?

[oldhippie]

171. "You have NO FUCKING RIGHT WHATSOVEVER ..."

You have NO FUCKING RIGHT WHATSOVEVER to use deadly force in protecting the property of others.

You do in Texas.

[obamanut2012]

50. Theft is not a home invasion, and theft is not a capital crime

[Snake Alchemist]

55. It is if you're in my house.

Or as far as I'm concerned any home that has pets.

[obamanut2012]

60. That isn't theft, as you well know

[Snake Alchemist]

64. What would you call it then? Liberation of goods? nt

[obamanut2012]

79. It isn't theft, as you well know

[Snake Alchemist]

86. Apparently, you do not have an answer as to what it was. nt

[pnwmom]

72. The shooters weren't at their own home. And nobody was inside the cabin either, not even a pet. n/t

[Snake Alchemist]

73. How would anybody know that? nt

[obamanut2012]

81. People know whether or not they own a cabin

[Snake Alchemist]

84. Yeah, that was the question.

How would your neighbor know whether or not you or your pets were inside if they witnessed a burglary.

[TheMadMonk]

111. 'twas the only pertinent question.

Where such laws exist at all, you ONLY have the right (you claim) to use deadly force in the protection of your OWN PERSONAL PROPERTY.

As for the less restricted right to use deadly force in the protection of life, your beliefs and speculations won't (or shouldn't) save you, ONLY what you directly witness (ie an immediate and credible threat to life) is legally relevant to your decision to exercise that right.

[Snake Alchemist]

115. Sure it was, lol.

So if you see something that looks like rape then you are only authorized to detain the suspected rapist and/or call the police. Good to know.

[TheMadMonk]

126. If you can do so safely then yes actually. However, funnily enough...

...most violent criminals when interupted in the act will immediately offer further violence, giving the neccessary "authority" to kill the bastard on the spot.

[pnwmom]

130. The fishermen never saw the teens inside the house. They were outside of the house

when they were shot at.

And the fishermen never witnessed a burglary. They only suspected that a burglary might have occurred before they got there.

[Snake Alchemist]

133. I had not heard that. Where is that from?

They had good suspicions then or got very lucky.

[pnwmom]

145. There are many media accounts. Here are a couple.

Dassinger is the attorney for one of the adult fishermen.


http://blog.al.com/live/2012/04/attorney_describes_gravine_isl.html

Dassinger said the couples were asleep in their camp house when the generator malfunctioned shutting off the air conditioning.

"Someone got up to fix it, and it happened again so things were quiet while they were working on it and someone heard a boat motor. Later they heard crashes and people talking. So eventually the men got in a boat and went over."

He said the 3 had a spotlight, a .22 rifle and a .17 rifle. When they shined the light toward the camp where the noises were coming from, "they saw what they thought were grown men that turned out to be teenagers."


The campers yelled at the teens to stop and then fired two warning shots as they scattered "to get them to stop" so the campers could call authorities. The campers then returned to their boat and headed away only to hear a young man screaming for help.

http://www.gulfcoastnewstoday.com/area_news/county_government/article_60ba2524-8d58-11e1-a82b-0019bb2963f4.html

Baldwin County Sheriff Huey “Hoss” Mack said noise at 4 a.m. prompted two of the three men in the camp to fired rifles in the darkness at the intruders. One shot hit Moody in the head. She was 15- to 30-feet from the dwelling.

[SwampG8r]

192. not everytime

sister in law bought 120 acres in east tenn
when clearing kudzu from what she thought was a stubby hill she uncovered a small cabin and a barn
true story

[pnwmom]

94. Numerous media reports have said the cabin was empty.

[pnwmom]

59. No burglar was in these men's houses. They left their own cabin

to follow noises they heard on the other side of the island.

And at the time they fired their shots, they were only SUSPICIOUS that the teens might have been burglarizing someone else's cabin. The teens were outside the cabin when the men, having arrived in their boat, first spotted them in their spotlight.

[Snake Alchemist]

61. So you were there? Please post the video.

Seems like their suspicions were spot on.

Let's put it this way. If there was a family tied up inside they would be heroes. Even if that were so, you never, never, never, never, never fire a warning shot.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

67. Why do you always take the side of violent gun death? Unhappy childhood?

[Snake Alchemist]

68. Why do you always take the side of criminals? Robin Hood fantasies? nt

[obamanut2012]

87. Like the convicted drug felon who illegally owned a gun you are supporting?

The guy who shot her? A Federal criminal who broke drug trafficking laws and had so little disregard for the law that he owned a gun when the Feds say he can't. How can you support someone like that?

[Snake Alchemist]

90. Who says I'm supporting him?

He should absolutely be charged with something and jailed if convicted. Firing a warning shot is beyond stupid.

[TheMadMonk]

114. Yeah you're right. A warning shot NEGATES ALL CASTLE DOCTRINE DEFENCES.

[Snake Alchemist]

118. .

[noiretextatique]

91. maybe she was wearing a hooodie

[treestar]

100. Innocent until proven guilty?

Even "criminals" cannot be indiscriminately shot at.

[obamanut2012]

83. +1

[pnwmom]

74. Well, they did fire "warning shots", according to one of their own defense attorneys. nt

[Snake Alchemist]

77. And that was idiocy. nt

[hack89]

11. She was hiding in the bushs when the shooter fired a warning shot

there is reason to believe the shooter had no idea she was there and that it was a tragic accident.

[MattBaggins]

17. The shooter CLAIMS he did that

He may have very well in fact done that but silly SYG laws seem to some to mean that there is no need at all for charges or investigations when someone is dead. "I was defending myself" should be taken at face value and total immunity given, legal and civil.

[hack89]

54. Can you show where SYG has been evoked in this case? nt

[MattBaggins]

149. Thankfully it has not in this case

The LEOs in this case have stated they treated this as a homicide from the get go and that is to the chagrin of many overly ardent supporters of RKBA laws here on DU. Notice I said "seems to some" in my post.

[stevenleser]

18. So the shooter fired a warning shot into a bush? First off, warning shots should not be fired. 2nd..

if you have to fire one, doesnt it make sense to fire one close to straight up in the air?

This does not pass the smell test.

[Snake Alchemist]

26. What is ironic is that people who get upset about police shootings often say "why couln't they fire

a warning shot?"

[naaman fletcher]

176. yup

Movies have been one of the worst things when it comes to the average joe's understanding of firearms. Anyway, I am all for shooting robbers in your house. If there is ever one in my house, I will immediatley shoot him.

That being said, the above commenter is right. you don't fire warning shots. Whoever fired is guilty of 2nd degree manslaughter or something like that.

[hack89]

29. I agree with you that warning shots are never a good idea.

why would firing straight up be a good idea - you have no idea where that bullet will come down. Doesn't it make more sense to fire it at an area you can see?

[Recursion]

56. If you just want to warn someone, chamber a round

It's an instantly-recognizable sound and gets your point across very well.

[hack89]

58. In this case I would have simply let them go. nt

[obamanut2012]

88. Exactly

It wasn't even their cabin.

[pnwmom]

107. These men had no business warning anyone.

They were just a gang of vigilantes.

[AmazingSchnitzel]

158. I'm trying to imagine a scenario...

... where my weapon doesn't already have a round chambered. (As it always does)

Warning shots are crap though...

[frylock]

19. if you're stupid enough to fire a warning shot you fire it in the air ffs..

warning shot my ass.

[Snake Alchemist]

27. Bad idea no matter where it's fired. nt

[hack89]

32. No. How do you know where it will come down?

warning shots are never a good idea but I can see why the shooter would fire at an area where he would know where the bullet went.

[frylock]

143. yeh, the bullet went right into that girl's head..

the back of her head to be specific.

[Recursion]

65. Newtonian Physics 101

Think back to high school physics, draw a ballistic trajectory parabola, and convince yourself that firing into the air is a bad idea.

[frylock]

142. if you're stupid enough to fire a warning shot

[tosh]

22. A warning shot fired into the bushes?

Okay.

[hack89]

34. Firing blindly into the air is an even worse idea

that's why you should never fire warning shots.

[pnwmom]

63. It was 4 am and pitch dark. The defense attorney of one of the men

said it was a warning shot at the scattering teens to "make them stop."

And that it was a tragic accident.

Right. A tragic accident because someone thought it was a good idea to shoot out into the darkness at a group of scattering teens.

Anyway, there are charges that can apply for these accidental deaths -- negligent homicide and manslaughter.

[Hoyt]

98. Sure thing, a "warning shot" shot dead-center to the head -- He was aiming at her is my guess.

Of all the places a "warning shot" could have landed, it just happened to hit her square in the head. I think the shooter is lying.

[TorchTheWitch]

163. so do I

I see this a WAY too much of a coincidence that blindly firing into bushes in the dark squarely hit her in the head. She was only about 15 feet away from the other scattering kids, so there's no way he DIDN'T shoot in their general direction. Warning shot my ass.

[frylock]

15. wtf does that have to do with recklessly discharging a firearm?!

you're actually condoning people just randomly firing into the darkness? do you even own a fucking firearm?!

[proud2BlibKansan]

25. So shooting her was okay?

[pnwmom]

31. What difference does that really make? I said that the campers claim they were

protecting property. That's why the teens were arrested -- the campers claimed the teens had been burglarizing. But at the moment they shot her, the teens were all outside and so were the campers. They had no way to know whether the teens had just broken into a cabin or not.

And the last I heard, we don't have a death sentence for burglary, much less suspicion of burglary.

I did add a sentence to my OP about the alleged burglary. It does nothing to change my opinion about the lack of any justification for firing warning shots out into the night.

[Chorophyll]

35. Odd that you think any of this merits shooting a kid in the head.

Did the property owners ever hear of calling the police? Because that's what I would have done.

[obamanut2012]

37. Theft is not a Capital Crime in this country

The girl was also shot as she was running away.

[MH1]

47. Yep. Guilty until proven innocent, I say! And death to all burglars!

Oh, wait.


Where'd I leave that sarcasm thingy?

[HangOnKids]

71. I'm Sure You Are Sorry She Passed

Did you ever lie to your parents about where you were? Not that this aspect of the story is germane or not, but you brought it up. I will wait for your reply.

[coalition_unwilling]

78. I had placed that poster on Full Ignore without comment for the

absolute heartlessness of the comment and the hollow 'sorry' he uttered before trashing the victim. I took him off Full Ignore, just so I could see if anyone else had registered. Whew! I'm putting him back on Full Ignore, as I don't care to read another word he writes. EVER

But thank you for calling him out.

[HangOnKids]

95. You Are Welcome

I have never encountered this person before, but his comment needs to be held up to scrutiny.

[treestar]

99. Still, shooting her is not justified

She was not in the person's home.

[jpak]

108. She was not armed and was not charged with burglary

apologist fail

yup

[fascisthunter]

147. Too Many in this country are sick

way too many think shooting people for theft is ok... shows how little Americans care about human beings... it's sick.

[Blue_Tires]

152. Our American obsession with property rights take precedent above anything else

[Blue_Tires]

153. You left out the part where the "concerned citizens'" official story doesn't make

a hell of a lot of sense, either...

Or maybe you also have the superhuman ability to "hear" a break-in over long distances...

[Iggo]

166. And for that they deserve to die!

[baldguy]

194. So, juveniles acting juvenilely absolve the murderers from murder?

[Brickbat]

2. A sad and ugly story on all sides.

[Hoyt]

5. I'm sure gun culture is praying for no charges against the shooter.

Wouldn't want to set a precedent that might keep them from shooting the next 17 yo in the back of the head that was not a threat to them.

Nor was there any property in an unoccupied fish camp worth shooting someone over.

Oh well, what's the use of having guns if you can't shoot someone when an opportunity presents, no matter how flimsy.

[hack89]

13. First we need to find out if the shooter was even aware of the girl when he fired

from the accounts I have seen, she was hiding in the bushes when the shooter fired a warning shot to stop her "friend" from running away.

[frylock]

23. no, we don't need to know that..

reckless discharge is a reckless discharge, regardless of the intent.

[stevenleser]

24. You're making it worse not better. Why would one fire at all if there is no imminent danger.

Warning shots to keep from running away?

Private people don't have the authority to do that. Unless they witnessed people harming someone else or the people were posing an imminent danger to them, they have no right to fire or even brandish a weapon in this situation.

[hack89]

41. I agree that the shooter should be charged

the question is with what? Knowing whether the shooter was aware of the victim makes a huge difference in the eventual charge.

I also think her friends should be charged for her death.

[obamanut2012]

39. No, you don't

Reckless discharge is reckless discharge, especially when you are aware people are there.

[hack89]

44. I agree

Hoyt was implying that the shooter deliberately targeted the girl. The shooter should be charged - the question is what the specific charge will be.

[obamanut2012]

52. Gotcha

[pnwmom]

46. Negligent homicide and manslaughter don't require intent.

Even if the shooter didn't purposely aim at the girl, he shouldn't have been firing off in the dark at the "scattering" teens to, in one of the defense attorneys' words, "make them stop."

[hack89]

49. Never said it didn't

The poster I was replying to implied that the victim was deliberately targeted. That's all.

[ieoeja]

151. Actually, the post was about "gun culture". It was not about the shooters in this case.

The post is only talking to the motives of the RTK Kill* subset of the RTK Bear** subset of the RTK*** crowd. And the post is correct. Kill advocates repeatedly argue for the right to deliberately kill someone. And they probably would be happier if the killers in this case are never charged.

[font size=1][color=gray]
* These people disgust me.
** I agree with these people in their own communities, but not when they ignore the will of people in other communities.
*** I am one of these people.
[/color][/font]

[Recursion]

51. And felony murder for the friends doesn't require their intent either

If they all three were committing burglary, and she died during the commission (and, let's face it, getting shot by a homeowner is a pretty frigging foreseeable consequence of breaking into someone's house), that's pretty much the textbook definition for felony murder for the two survivors.

[pnwmom]

89. The cabin was empty, and Summer wasn't shot by its owner.

She was shot by a gang of vigilantes.

[AmazingSchnitzel]

164. Similar to...

... if I saw someone robbing a bank or store, drew my weapon, chose to fire at a robber and killed the getaway driver or a lookout instead. The person was not actively pointing guns in people's faces but had placed themselves in a situation that would potentially, possibly likely, end in violence.

The analogy isn't perfect as I would never be so dumb as to fire a warning shot but felony murder is felony murder.

[pnwmom]

167. There is no evidence she was a look-out or otherwise involved

other than that she was near enough to the three boys to get killed.

Logically, you can't have it both ways. Some people want to excuse the shooters for accidentally shooting Summer because they say the gunmen were aiming AWAY from where the boys were. If this is true, then Summer wasn't near the boys and whatever the boys were doing. IF they WERE involved in burglary, which has not been proven at all yet, it could have been an impulsive thing that she wanted no part of -- and so she had separated herself from them. There's no way to know.

[AmazingSchnitzel]

168. If she was a random hiker tromping through the woods...

... and had no affiliation with the group then that was tragic bad luck for her. It would still result in a felony murder charge for the robbers though. Along the same lines as if a civilian is killed during the aforementioned bank robbery.

I was under the impression that she was associated with the robbers.

[pnwmom]

169. I didn't say she was a random hiker.

But I haven't seen any evidence that the crimes were pre-planned and that she knew ahead of time and deliberately got involved with them.

Suppose she was with some boys and one or two of them decided impulsively to break into a cabin? Would that have been her fault?

A lot of people are making judgments based on information that just isn't available yet. We don't know the boys were actually involved in a burglary, much less Summer.

And even if the boys had just finished robbing the cabin, that does NOT mean felony murder charges would automatically apply. Those charges would apply if her death had occurred in the course of an ongoing burglary -- but the burglary, if it did occur, was not ongoing at the time.

[AmazingSchnitzel]

172. Fleeing the scene is still part of a crime in progress...

Random hiker, unwilling participant, willing participant, evil mastermind of the whole thing...

The felony murder charge could apply as her death was a result of the crime that the boys were committing. Common sense says that at least some crime was committed, violation of private property etc.. They were in a home that wasn't theirs or is that under contention?

When you go into places you shouldn't bad things can happen to you and your associates or to people in the surrounding area.

[pnwmom]

173. That the boys were ever in the cabin IS under contention: no one has claimed that they saw the boys

inside the cabin, and at least one of their attorneys denies it.

[Hoyt]

96. Personally, I'm suspicious of what someone who shot unarmed girl in head says are the facts.

Especially suspicious if the guy was, in fact, convicted of drug charges.

In any event, a shot dead-center to the head doesn't sound very likely unless you were aiming at her head. The odds of hitting that little square foot of human anatomy from a warning shot are pretty close to nil.

What's disturbing is shooting teenagers over something that can't be worth much.

[naaman fletcher]

183. That's not true at all.

Anyone in the "gun culture" knows that you never shoot at anything you don't intend to hit, and you never fire "warning shots". You are wrong.

[ananda]

7. This is a complicated case.

Yes, one of the shooters should be arrested for possession of a firearm after having a previous record for cocaine use, drug trafficking, and use of a deadly weapon.

However, the three boys with Summer Moody were caught in the act of felony burglary; and I presume that the men in charge of the cabin and the area have a right to protect it.

The problem as I see it is that a "warning shot" should miss by a wide margin...

All parties involved .. the shooter and the burglarizing teens .. deserve to face consequences.

[stevenleser]

28. You are overstating what the teens did. They thought they were gaining entry to an unused campground

building.

While that technically satisfies the definition of burglary, to call it that is overplaying it by several levels.

[Recursion]

42. So, something that is exactly the definition of "burglary" shouldn't be called "burglary"?

Maybe you're thinking of "robbery", which burglaries can sometimes become -- without knowing the timeline it's not clear whether or not this did become robbery.

Don't break into other people's houses. For one thing, you might get shot.

[pnwmom]

80. The shooters first spotted the teens at some distance (15-30 feet) away from the building.

They only suspected the teens MIGHT have been involved in a burglary.

Do you think it's okay to shoot at anyone you see outside at 4 am, just in case they might be burglars of some building somewhere?

[Recursion]

40. For that matter, her friends could be facing felony murder, conceivably (nt)

[pnwmom]

82. Which would be a great injustice, if the actual shooter isn't charged with anything. n/t

[pnwmom]

53. No one was caught in the act of felony burglary, or any burglary.

Not according to the defense lawyer's public statement.

The fishermen, after they arrived in their boat, say they first spotted the teens outside, at about 4 am, about 15-30 feet away from a cabin. The campers knew of previous burglaries in the area and were concerned, so they fired a warning shot at the scattering teens to "make them stop."

Two of the fishermen had criminal drug records that probably should have prevented them from using a gun.

[Turbineguy]

8. Shoot first

ask questions later.

[MattBaggins]

20. Shoot. Claim SYG. No further questions needed.

[Spoonman]

125. SHOOT FIRST

and live to answer the questions later!

[Snake Alchemist]

10. This is why warning shots are always a bad idea. nt

[obamanut2012]

45. Thos was not a home invasion, and theft is not a capital crime in the United States

Any gun safety class also teaches you never to fire "warning shots," because they are useless and also dangerous.

The teens should be charged, but so should the shooter.

Peace to her family.

[pnwmom]

85. Whether the teens actually broke into and burglarized the cabin is still in dispute.

But there is no dispute that someone killed Summer Moody.

[Spoonman]

92. Bernie Madoff didn't "physically harm" anyone either! n/t

[Fumesucker]

97. Madoff was shot by a felon to keep him from fleeing?

I did not know that.

/Johnny Carson

[Spoonman]

109. Of course not,

but he should have been!

[jpak]

105. Waiting for the "she deserved it" vigilante apologist crowd

3...2...1...

[a la izquierda]

112. You missed the first response.

It was the first thing I read, as my computer is a bit wonky.

[Cali_Democrat]

110. RIP Summer Moody

May the gun nuts rot in hell. They get off on shooting unarmed teenagers. It's like a high for them.

Sick bastards.

[polly7]

141. Aw shit. That's very sad news.

Hopefully, the murderer will face his time in court and receive justice due.

RIP Summer. My condolences to all her loved ones and friends.

[pnwmom]

155. The DA has just announced that she sees no probable cause for prosecuting the shooter.

She adds, however, that the grand jury convened to investigate the burglary has broad powers that would allow it to extend its investigation to the shooting.

Her decision is based on her opinion that the shooters didn't actually mean to kill Summer. I didn't hear most of the press conference, so I don't know if anyone there asked her about criminally negligent homicide, or other charges that wouldn't require intent to kill.

She says Alabama gun laws only prevent felons from carrying pistols, not rifles; and that she doesn't know the status of the Federal investigation into possible violation of Federal gun laws.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002614688

[Whiskeytide]

157. I think I'm one of the posters you think...

... has defended the fishermen. I have not. What I have objected to throughout the posting on this tragedy is turning a phrase or two to change the meaning of a statement, whether intentional or not.

We can all agree that "a reckless and incompetent asshole stupidly - and needlessly - fired a warning shot that struck Summer Moody in the back of the head and killed her." There could be charges filed for that. There probably should be. But murder or manslaughter it is not.

But that is a different statement from "a gun-toting vigilante shot AT some teens and struck Summer Moody in the back of the head and killed her." That could be murder, and it most certainly would be manslaughter. The problem is that this is not, by all accounts, what happened.

Law enforcement re-enacted the events sometime in the last few days - at night under similar lighting - and they determined that the shooter could not have seen Summer from where he fired the shot. The shooter - per lawyer Stankowski - says he did not see her when he fired the shot. I have seen no evidence to refute that conclusion. Until I do, I'm not going to change my definition of these guys from "stupid, reckless assholes" to "gun-toting, vigilantes who shot at someone."

[pnwmom]

160. I've never thought they deliberately tried to shoot her.

But we have different understandings of the possibility of manslaughter. I thought it could apply even to an unintentional, but criminally negligent, shooting.

[Whiskeytide]

188. It might under some circumstances...

... but criminally negligent homicide would fit those facts better.

However, I understand there are now some statements from the boys that shed a new light on what might have happened. If the facts are closer to their version, then the shooters would - or should - face manslaughter charges.

[JoePhilly]

159. We should definitely expand the situations in which an untrained person can ...

brandish and discharge firearms.

Look, if you feel threatened, you should be able to pull out your weapon, and then wave it around.

Strange sound down the street ... GET OUT THERE!!!!

Think you need to fire a few "warning shots"?? DO IT!!!! Aim at the bushes!!!!

And then, if nothing happens, you go home ... tell the wife how you scared off some bad guys, and get some HERO SEX ... its a WIN WIN!!!

Just another Walter Mitty with a gun.

[Life Long Dem]

161. In the boat they fired upon the island

How is that a warning shot? That's a negligent warning shot. Thus, a negligent manslaughter charge.

William Hearn, Lonnie Davison and Larry Duncan Jr. heard the 4:00 a.m. burglary and hopped in a boat to check it out. When they reached the section of the island where the robbery occurred, two men fired warning shots. One of the shots hit Moody in the head.

They could have fired into the water or anywhere but in front of them on the island.

[pnwmom]

162. I agree that it was negligent. But the DA has decided she didn't see probable cause

for pressing charges.

She has said, however, that the Grand Jury investigating the burglary could still decide to do that -- it will be up to them.

[grantcart]

181. your recitation of the facts omit some key facts.

1) The men approached a group of teens burglarizing their cabin and they saw that one of teens carried a hand gun.

2) They fired a warning shot away from the teens that they saw and unfortunately, and bizzarely it struck the girl who was hiding in the bushes.

these facts were in the link that you provided and I think change considerably the culpability of those that fired the weapons and the issues discussed in the thread.

[pnwmom]

185. Those are not "facts."

Unless you think anything that convicted felons say are "facts."

The police have never found a handgun although they searched for it, and even searched in the water. So all we have is the word of the men for that -- these men with criminal records, two of whom recklessly shot their rifles out into the dark and were seeking to justify their own actions. It was very dark, and the teens were not close. Are you really going to call the presence of a handgun a "fact"? Or could it be that the men, in the dark, and at that distance, only thought they saw a handgun? Or thought that would be a good excuse to tell the Sheriff?

Also, the men did not say they saw the teens burglarizing the cabin. They were worried because there had been previous break-ins of the cabins. When they encountered the teens, the teens were outside, and they were (according to one of the men's attorneys) in the process of scattering. The teens didn't stop when the men told them to, so the men, according to their attorney, fired to "make them stop." (When the Sheriff came later, he did find evidence of a break-in, and an owner said there were some missing tools -- but this still doesn't tell us when the break-in occurred or if these teens were responsible. The break-in could have occurred recently, but not on that night, and other people could have been responsible. Until the trial, we won't know what facts link the teens to a burglary.)

I don't think the fact that the men didn't intend to kill the girl relieves them of all responsibility. They couldn't know how many teens were out there, besides the two they spotted in their flashlight. It was reckless of them to fire their "warning shots" anywhere. That wasn't a defensive action, even by the description of Hearn's own attorney. They wanted to make the teens stop running away so they could turn them into the authorities. They were acting like the island police force, but firing recklessly in a way that could cause an actual law enforcement officer to lose his badge.

[grantcart]

187. they are the 'facts' in the link that you sourced

if you source the link then I don't think that you should cherry pick the facts and slant the presentation and leave the readers to try and investigate the facts.

I am inclined to agree with your perception I am objecting to the way that you presented it.

You presented us with a link that had a different version than what you think happened. I suggest that you re edit it to include the entire story and why you think that the facts that are reported should not be given weight.

Also the fact that a person was convicted of a felon in the past doesn't mean that they are committing perjury now. The fact that you give that element of the story such prominent weight weakens rather than strengthens your other points.

[Fumesucker]

190. One group, the ones doing the shooting, has convicted felons as members..

The other group, the ones being shot at, do not..

All else being equal, which group would you think is the more trustworthy?

Bear in mind that the teens are innocent of anything until proven guilty.

I'm really starting to wonder who the shooting group might be connect to, having lived much of my life in this sort of place I know full well how powerful the good ol' boy network can be, I've seen it in action more times than I care to count.

[grantcart]

191. my points have nothing to do with the substance of the case

but how the OP presented the story.

If the OP wants to convince us that something terrible went on (and I am inclined to believe that it has) it doesn't help to leave out the exculpatory facts in the initial presentation.

I listened to the link that the OP provided and realized that only half of the story was being told.

The fact that they were former felons shouldn't be given too much weight unless it is coroborated by something else.

In fact the fact that they were previously convicted cuts both ways. It means that these guys are not part of the elite circle and that a close buddy with the Sherriff and the Prosecutor. It means that when these guys were in trouble before they didn't believe them and sent them to jail but that this time they, for whatever reason, found them credible.

The issue that one of the boys had a gun and the issue that the shooters were shooting away from the boys that were visible and hit somebody that was hidden in the bushes was also relevent.

It seems to me that if the shooters had a bad intention they would have shot at the boys that were visible.

But again my point had to do with cherry picking the facts in putting out the case.

[Fumesucker]

193. Evidently the stories differ..

Which is of course unsurprising, both sides are going to put the best possible face on their actions..

So we really don't know for sure yet what the situation was, quite possibly never will. There have been enough people on death row exonerated by DNA evidence in the last decade or so to make me at least skeptical in a case of this sort.

In my experience being somehow connected in that kind of place definitely trumps having a record, even a felony one for drug sales. It's interesting to me that it took quite a few days for the details of the records of the parties doing the shooting to come out.

Look at the Zimmerman/Martin case, the police and prosecutors were remarkably negligent in their investigation and handling of the incident and it took some time for the details on Zimmerman to come out, indeed Zimmerman had a violent record while Martin had no record of violence at all.

[ileus]

186. What a horrible accident....prayers for her family.

[Catherine Vincent]

189. Just like in Texas

Joe Horn II

RIP Summer Moody.