Another Florida "Castle Doctrine" Murder

[Scuba]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/26/florida-man-kills-door-to-door-salesman-i%E2%80%99ll-kill-anybody-that-steps-on-my-property/

Kenneth Bailey Roop, 52, has been charged with second-degree murder for killing 30-year-old Nicholas Rainey.

A co-worker who witnessed the shooting said Rainey had knocked on Roop’s door, but received no answer. While Rainey was walking down the drive-way, Roop pulled up in his pickup truck and asked why Rainey was at his house. Rainey explained that he was selling steak and seafood. The witness said Roop then pulled out a black handgun and shot Rainey. As Rainey lay on the ground, Roop fired another bullet into the back of his head.

Roop later told police that he shot Rainey in the head “for effect” and that he had three no trespassing signs on his property. Roop said he feared for his life.

“I’m not going to give him the chance to do something to me,” he told police. “I was in fear.”

[treestar]

1. Does he think he just has to say that?

Does not sound like a set of facts under which it would be reasonable to be in fear of one's life.

[Monk06]

42. Yes that's what these castle doctrine creeps think. They can murder and claim they

were in fear for their life. And they learned that trick from the cops.

Back in the day if you shot an unarmed man it was automatic murder
followed by hanging.

[RKP5637]

2. What a strange country we live in ... n/t

[russspeakeasy]

3. This state exhausts me.

[niceguy]

8. It has nothing to do

Witj syg or Florida . People are killed for the stupidest of reasons all of the time. We had someone killed where I live over an Xbox ....

[hatrack]

11. It has everything to do with SYG

Here's this paranoid assclown, described in the coverage I've seen to date as confrontational and combative with neighbors, even with kids who happened to accidently step on his precious lawn, violating his precious property rights.

And now, thanks to Stand Your Ground laws and "Castle Doctrine", here's his license to finally KICK SOME ASS (or so he believes in his tiny mind), so he shoots some poor SOB door-to-door salesman who has violated his precious property rights.

No, let me correct that - he shoots the guy through the shoulder, and then walks over to where the man he's shot is lying on the ground, points the gun down and fires a second shot into the man's skull.

Why does he do this? In part because he's an angry paranoid assclown. But he also does it because he thinks he has a license to kill thanks to hack right-wing politicians who pass laws like this to get the votes of morons like this, without ever bothering to explain to said morons that real life is a bit more complicated than a 30-second campaign commercial.

It has everything to do with SYG.

[Blue_Tires]

48. yeah, he clearly looks like a "likes to fight" guy

He'll fit right in at the penitentary...Hope he knows how to make friends on the inside...

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

4. If Rainey had no weapon on him and the witness' account is complete & accurate...

Roop is going to jail for a long time. He can try to claim Castle Doctrine or SYG - but it's going to get thrown out. More proof to the disbelievers that Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground is NOT a license to murder people. Self defense is legal... Murder is not. This sounds like murder.

[pennylane100]

24. Lets see what happens to Zimmerman

before we definitely say that murder is not legal.

[2on2u]

5. Telling someone to leave your property at gunpoint (if that is at all necessary) is one thing...

what happened here is a murder.... and no lawyer is going to change that. Now the jerk can be afraid in prison.

[LisaL]

6. Sounds like all he needed is to say he doesn't want any steak or seafood.

And with two shots fired, I wonder why they didn't charge him with first degree murder.

[2on2u]

7. Hell, the cynical side of me wants to believe he had it in for the guy and ordered

steak and seafood..... and I know that is just wrong but it would not be outside of Lifetime TV to make a plot for one of their "dramatic moment" episodes.

[Edweird]

19. Because 1st degree requires premeditation.

[LisaL]

20. The second shot into the back of the head doesn't qualify?

[Edweird]

21. No.

Premeditation means he planned to murder this guy in advance.

[TheMadMonk]

29. No, but planning what he'd do if he ever got the opportunity...

...would qualify him.

And I'll bet it will not be hard at all to find statements along the line of: "The next God damned salesman..."

Should be 1st degree, because this arsehole has clearly been looking for an excuse to kill someone for a long time.

[Edweird]

34. Meh, I'm not a lawyer but as I understand it

if you were to come home and find your wife having sex with some guy and you shot him that would be 2nd degree - if you didn't know she was doing it. I'm pretty sure it would be 2nd degree even if you said you would shoot somebody under those circumstances. Now if you KNEW she was having an affair and planned to kill the guy and made an effort to catch him for the purpose of killing him - that as I understand it would be 1st degree.

2nd degree, as I understand it, fits the circumstances. But again, I'm not a lawyer. However, the people that decided to charge him ARE lawyers, so there's that.

[treestar]

47. In law school the adultery example

is manslaughter. If still under the pressure of the provocative event with no chance to cool down, you can call that manslaughter. Also imperfect self defense, where the law finds you do not have a case of self defense, but the person did injure you, and such and that is manslaughter.

2nd degree was where it was not planned (no premeditation) but the person was doing something willful and wanton that could foreseeably lead to a death, like shooting at a passenger train. Maybe no one gets killed, but it's willfully taking chances with lives.

[treestar]

46. Depends on state law, but the planning does not have to be days ahead

He planned to shoot this guy and did it. And the guy was not threatening him.

[Logical]

9. I am not sure you can even tell them to leave your property at gunpoint without....

being charged with felony assault. At least in Kansas you would need to be in fear of death or great bodily harm. A man standing at your door dos not seem to meet that criteria.

[LisaL]

10. Well in FL he likely would have gotten away with it, had he pulled out his gun and told the salesman

to leave.

[Logical]

12. I don't agree with that law. Seems excessive and unneeded. n-t

[Edweird]

22. You are only allowed to draw your weapon when you are in enough danger

that you need to USE it. In other words, waving your gun around as a warning is aggravated assault. 'Warning shots' are also illegal for the same reason. If you draw your weapon and don't use it then you didn't need to draw it and thus you broke the law by drawing it.

[LisaL]

28. Using that logic, if somebody is trying to rob you or beat you, and you draw your weapon,

causing them to run away, you are guilty of aggravated assault since you didn't actually use it. I don't think so.

[Edweird]

31. Whatever. I'm telling you what the law is.

If you don't like it or don't believe me that's fine. I am, however, a Florida resident and a CCW holder so this stuff is important for me to know. Your assumptions about what is and is not legal in Florida are wrong.

[LisaL]

41. So, if somebody comes up to you and tells you "give me your wallet" and you get out your gun-

and that somebody runs away-you still have to shoot them, otherwise you are guilty of assault?
Is that what you are trying to say?

[Edweird]

45. Actually, your scenario wouldn't require any self defense at all.

"Give me your wallet"
"Fuck off"

Shooting someone based on words alone is a good way to go directly to prison. There needs to be a imminent threat that justifies the use of deadly force.

[Kaleva]

35. That's incorrect.

Brandishing a weapon or firing a warning shot with just cause is perfectly legal.

[Edweird]

37. Maybe where you are but not here in Florida.

Warning shots are illegal and will get you arrested.

Fla. mom gets 20 years for firing warning shots
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/

[Kaleva]

43. She got 20 years for felony assault with a gun and not for firing warning shots.

"Alexander, who did not have a criminal record before the shooting, was convicted of felony assault with a gun. "

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/11/marissa-alexander-sentenced_n_1510113.html


"10-20-life

Mandates a minimum 10 year prison term for certain felonies, or attempted felonies in which the offender possesses a firearm or destructive device
Mandates a minimum 20 year prison term when the firearm is discharged
Mandates a minimum 25 years to LIFE if someone is injured or killed
Mandates a minimum 3 year prison term for possession of a firearm by a felon
Mandates that the minimum prison term is to be served consecutively to any other term of imprisonment imposed"

http://www.dc.state.fl.us/oth/10-20-life/

While the woman claimed she had fired warning shots, the state's attorney prosecuting the case was able to convince the jury otherwise with the evidence.

"Angela Corey, the state attorney who oversaw the case against Alexander, said that justice was indeed served and that Alexander was angry and reckless, not fearful, on the night of the shooting. Just because no one was harmed in the incident doesn't make the shooting any less a punishable crime, Corey said.

"I feel like when someone fires a loaded gun inside of a home with two children standing in the direction where the bullet was fired, we have to have tough laws that say you don't do that," Corey told HuffPost. "Justice, with the laws of the state of Florida, was served. But I don't believe her supporters will ever believe that.""

Firing in the direction of someone is not firing a warning shot.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/11/marissa-alexander-sentenced_n_1510113.html

While on parole before the trial, the woman went to the man's house to drop off their child and she attacked him (this was verified by the children present who witnessed it). Her parole was revoked and she was remitted to jail.

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/120355498/Alexander-Arrest-Report-Dec-2010

[LisaL]

49. He was found not guilty previously for pulling a gun on a meter reader.

So, I might not live in FL, but I knew he would have been able to get away with just pulling a gun.
http://www.news-press.com/article/20120726/NEWS01/120725038

[cherokeeprogressive]

13. There is nothing in anything I read leading me to believe "Stand Your Ground" or "Castle Doctrine"

had anything to do with this murder.

It simply sounds like straight up murder.

I hope this guy gets the maximum punishment allowable by Florida law.

[LisaL]

14. Maybe you missed the part where he claims he was in fear for his life.

[cherokeeprogressive]

15. I'll bet you a donation to DU he doesn't get off the hook for murder

because of his claim. Someone else witnessed the murder, no?

This guy goes away for a long time, and deservedly so.

[LisaL]

16. I certainly hope he doesn't get off the hook.

[littlewolf]

17. this has NOTHING to do with

castle doctrine ... which is defending your home against
break in .... I don't believe it is SYG either .. he may try
and claim that ... but he is just a murderer ....

[Skip Intro]

33. +1

[Edweird]

18. He's been charged with 2nd degree murder. What do you believe 'castle doctrine'

has to do with this?

[LisaL]

26. Because that's what he appears to be using for his defense.

[Edweird]

36. If it was legitimate 'castle doctrine' or SYG he wouldn't have been charged.

So, it's pretty clear that they have been eliminated. His own words show that he was outside any legal protection. 'Castle doctrine' or SYG do not apply. There is no connection.

[LisaL]

40. That is not accurate.

Even if he is charged, he can use SYG for his defense.

[Kaleva]

44. It won't go to trial if the judge says during the preliminary hearing that SYG applies

"If prosecutors press charges, any defendant claiming self-defense is now entitled to a hearing before a judge. At the immunity hearing, a judge must decide based on the "preponderance of the evidence" whether to grant immunity. That's a far lower burden than "beyond a reasonable doubt," the threshold prosecutors must meet at trial.

"It's a very low standard to prove preponderance," said Weaver, the West Palm Beach lawyer. "If 51 percent of the evidence supports your claim, you get off." "

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133

[krispos42]

23. If the story is accurate, toss him in jail.

He was outside the house and walking away.

[lpbk2713]

25. The "castle" Roop wanted to defend so violently ...

will soon belong to the Rainey family if they get a good lawyer.

Just my opinion.

[whistler162]

27. Another out of control....

vegan!

[HiPointDem]

30. and the salesman was white. i expected a black guy.

[Skip Intro]

32. DARN! nt

[HiPointDem]

39. what's your problem?

[Skip Intro]

38. If a yard had 3 "No Tresspassing" signs, I'd stay out of that yard.

Just sayin'

I don't want people I don't know in my yard. I wouldn't shoot them for it, unless I really did feel threatened, but, you know, get off of my damn property.

tangent

If you've come into my house uninvited and unannounced and I don't know you, I consider you a mortal threat, and you should fear for your life.

/tangent

From what's reported, the incident in the OP sounds like murder, pure and simple - nothing to do with the Castle Doctrine, however. I hope to read a more detailed report of what happened.

[adamuu]

50. It's "his land" but it's in "our country"

Let's never forget that.

[tblue37]

51. In the video included with the story,

the reporter describes how the killer used to follow a neighborhood woman as she walked her dog (probably intending to shoot her if the dog did something on his lawn). The neighbors were so concerned for her safety that they started walking with her to make sure she was safe from the guy.

The article mentions that an off-duty cop came over after the shooting while the guy was reloading in his garage. He said to her, “If anyone steps on my property, I’m going to shoot them.” It sounds as though he has pretty much condemned himself with his own words. That off-duty cop held him at gunpoint until the on-duty cops arrived, forcing him to drop his weapon. I’m thinking she is lucky he didn’t shoot her, too.

(The video includes info not provided in the print article.)