Thread in GD for those of ya'll who dare not enter...

www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=391378&page=1

Updated, can anybody cite the GA code related to self defense in this situation.  See five2one's post below.

I like stories with a happy ending.

Georgia Boys  2
Shithogs         0

I like it.

ARH

Quoted: Thread in GD for those of ya'll who dare not enter... www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=391378&page=1

UPDATE:  Check out what the DA says about GA law.  I was under the impression that a justification was granted when in fear of grave bodily harm of self or others and not simple home invasion.  

Does anyone know the actual GA code where justified homocide is spelled out?  What do y'all know about this stuff?

Posted on Thu, Sep. 29, 2005
Grant Blankenship, The Telegraph

Fred Taylor stands by the window in his Macon apartment where an intruder recently broke in.

Mercer student cleared of wrongdoing in fatal shooting of intruder

By Tim Sturrock

TELEGRAPH STAFF WRITER

Fred Taylor shot and killed a man last week, but the Bibb County district attorney said Wednesday the shooting was justified.

The incident began in the early morning hours of Sept. 18 when Taylor heard someone outside of his Walnut Street home in Macon.

A few minutes later, Taylor said, the intruder broke a window and climbed inside. With the burglar alarm blaring, Taylor's girlfriend was upstairs frantically talking to a 911 dispatcher.

"I'm thinking to myself, if the alarm has not deterred this guy, something is going on," said Taylor, a 21-year-old Mercer University law student. "In my mind, I'm thinking he is going to do us some harm."

The incident ended with Taylor fatally shooting Edward Anderson, 42, police said. Police said they don't know Anderson's motive for the break-in.

District Attorney Howard Simms said Wednesday that Taylor, of Suffolk, Va., will not be charged.

Simms said the case is "crystal clear" and that Taylor did nothing wrong.

Simms said that under Georgia law, people have the right to defend their homes with force if they know the intruder broke into the home and isn't a family member.

Taylor said he was relieved by the decision, but the incident still weighs on his mind.

"It takes some time before you stop constantly thinking about it," he said, explaining that he's trying to focus on his school work.

The night of the shooting, Taylor said, he was watching television with his girlfriend, Adrienne Warren. He said they heard someone, later identified as Anderson, outside on the porch. Warren went upstairs to call police, and Taylor grabbed his gun, Taylor said.

Taylor said he then turned off the lights and the television to let Anderson know someone was home. Moments later, Anderson started jiggling locks on the windows and doors, Taylor said.

Taylor said he waited on his staircase with his gun in his hand. The intruder broke the window pane, and the alarm started to scream, Taylor said.

"I was scared for my life," he said.

Anderson climbed through the window and walked past the stairs, Taylor said.

Taylor said he couldn't wait any longer. He fired a single shot, striking Anderson in the upper torso.

Taylor said he didn't know then if Anderson was dead or if he had a weapon. According to the 911 tape released Wednesday by Macon police, Warren was upstairs at the time of the shooting. She began screaming and crying when she heard a bang. She told dispatchers she didn't know who had been shot, according to the tape.

After police arrived, Taylor and his girlfriend went to the police station and talked to police, Taylor said. Four hours later, a private company had cleaned the scene, and Taylor went to bed.

"You never feel good about something like this," he said.

Taylor said moving to another house has occurred to him, but he acknowledged "it could happen anywhere. It could happen to anyone."

Taylor's lawyer, Doye Green, said Taylor did nothing wrong.

"Now this young man and young woman will have a mental scar for life," Green said.

Wow, that is interesting.  It is contrary to what I thought too.  I thought you could only defend yourself and your family's safety, not your property.  I'd love to hear from some of the LEOs on the board and see if they know anything.  I'll edit the title and see if I can get them in here.

www.legis.state.ga.us/cgi-bin/gl_codes_detail.pl?code=16-3-21


Check out the link. 16-3-21 spells out when one can and can't use force.  Just remember, dead men can't tell their side of the story.

In the news story, Taylor said the magic words "I was scared for my life".  Also taylor turned off the lights and TV which would let the burgler know someone was there but he broke in anyway. Remember it's all in how you articulate what happened. "Officer, I was in fear for my life."

This is the pertinent code section for the Macon case. I'm not highlighting sections because it is all equally important.

OCGA 16-3-23.

A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other´s unlawful entry into or attack upon a habitation; however, such person is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if:
(1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence;
(2) That force is used against another person who is not a member of the family or household and who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using such force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred; or
(3) The person using such force reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.

Good shoot.

FYI, post 1000.

Guys thanks for the info. and the clarification.  

Quoted: www.legis.state.ga.us/cgi-bin/gl_codes_detail.pl?code=16-3-21 Check out the link. 16-3-21 spells out when one can and can't use force.  Just remember, dead men can't tell their side of the story. In the news story, Taylor said the magic words "I was scared for my life".  Also taylor turned off the lights and TV which would let the burgler know someone was there but he broke in anyway. Remember it's all in how you articulate what happened. "Officer, I was in fear for my life."

Quoted: This is the pertinent code section for the Macon case. I'm not highlighting sections because it is all equally important. OCGA 16-3-23. A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other´s unlawful entry into or attack upon a habitation; however, such person is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if: (1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence; (2) That force is used against another person who is not a member of the family or household and who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using such force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred; or (3) The person using such force reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony. Good shoot. FYI, post 1000.

Quoted: This is the pertinent code section for the Macon case. I'm not highlighting sections because it is all equally important. OCGA 16-3-23. A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other´s unlawful entry into or attack upon a habitation; however, such person is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if: (1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence; (2) That force is used against another person who is not a member of the family or household and who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using such force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred; or (3) The person using such force reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony. Good shoot. FYI, post 1000.

Thank you for citting the proper code.  And just to be clear,  the law is written in such a way that ALL THREE conditions must be met, yes?   I think I understand condition number 2 but it seems to get in the way of spouses protecting themselves from a dangerous spouse.

Thank you again for the citation -- I love AR15.com.

Quoted: www.legis.state.ga.us/cgi-bin/gl_codes_detail.pl?code=16-3-21 Check out the link. 16-3-21 spells out when one can and can't use force.  Just remember, dead men can't tell their side of the story. In the news story, Taylor said the magic words "I was scared for my life".  Also taylor turned off the lights and TV which would let the burgler know someone was there but he broke in anyway. Remember it's all in how you articulate what happened. "Officer, I was in fear for my life."

Agreed, much better to say, "I feared for my life and the lives of my family" than, "I satisfied all three conditions of 16-3-21".    

Quoted: www.legis.state.ga.us/cgi-bin/gl_codes_detail.pl?code=16-3-21 Check out the link. 16-3-21 spells out when one can and can't use force.  Just remember, dead men can't tell their side of the story. In the news story, Taylor said the magic words "I was scared for my life".  Also taylor turned off the lights and TV which would let the burgler know someone was there but he broke in anyway. Remember it's all in how you articulate what happened. "Officer, I was in fear for my life."

Here is another question.   16-3-21 pertains only to being in my residence.   Are there any laws that cover me in my car or just walking around the street (i.e., I am CCW)?


EDITED TO ADD:  Maybe if I looked a little more I wouldn't have to ask silly questions.

16-3-21.
(a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other´s imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(b) A person is not justified in using force under the circumstances specified in subsection (a) of this Code section if he:
(1) Initially provokes the use of force against himself with the intent to use such force as an excuse to inflict bodily harm upon the assailant;
(2) Is attempting to commit, committing, or fleeing after the commission or attempted commission of a felony; or
(3) Was the aggressor or was engaged in a combat by agreement unless he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to such other person his intent to do so and the other, notwithstanding, continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful force.
(c) Any rule, regulation, or policy of any agency of the state or any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, or policy of any county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state which is in conflict with this Code section shall be null, void, and of no force and effect.
(d) In a prosecution for murder or manslaughter, if a defendant raises as a defense a justification provided by subsection (a) of this Code section, the defendant, in order to establish the defendant´s reasonable belief that the use of force or deadly force was immediately necessary, may be permitted to offer:
(1) Relevant evidence that the defendant had been the victim of acts of family violence or child abuse committed by the deceased, as such acts are described in Code Sections 19-13-1 and 19-15-1, respectively; and
(2) Relevant expert testimony regarding the condition of the mind of the defendant at the time of the offense, including those relevant facts and circumstances relating to the family violence or child abuse that are the bases of the expert´s opinion.

16-3-24.
(a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other´s trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with real property other than a habitation or personal property:
(1) Lawfully in his possession;
(2) Lawfully in the possession of a member of his immediate family; or
(3) Belonging to a person whose property he has a legal duty to protect.
(b) The use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to prevent trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with real property other than a habitation or personal property is not justified unless the person using such force reasonably believes that it is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
16-3-24.1.
As used in Code Sections 16-3-23 and 16-3-24, the term 'habitation' means any dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, and 'personal property' means personal property other than a motor vehicle.

16-3-24.2.
A person who uses threats or force in accordance with Code Section 16-3-23 or 16-3-24 shall be immune from criminal prosecution therefor unless any deadly force used by such person utilizes a weapon the carrying or possession of which is unlawful by such person under Part 2 or 3 of Article 4 of Chapter 11 of this title.

Quoted: Quoted: This is the pertinent code section for the Macon case. I'm not highlighting sections because it is all equally important. OCGA 16-3-23. A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other´s unlawful entry into or attack upon a habitation; however, such person is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if: (1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence; (2) That force is used against another person who is not a member of the family or household and who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using such force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred; or (3) The person using such force reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony. Good shoot. FYI, post 1000. Thank you for citting the proper code.  And just to be clear,  the law is written in such a way that ALL THREE conditions must be met, yes?   I think I understand condition number 2 but it seems to get in the way of spouses protecting themselves from a dangerous spouse. Thank you again for the citation -- I love AR15.com.

Either conditions ONE and TWO together must be met OR Three by itself.

Three is the most important one to keep in mind.

Also remember and understand the implications of the phrase "entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner ".  

It could come in handy later.