Rocker's Wife Shot in Bizarre Incident

[FCD]

This is a weird one, and it's probably worthy of some discussion.

LAPD was apparently involved in a vehicle pursuit after some suspects were involved in a hit and run accident.  When the pursued vehicle came to a stop on a busy highway the occupants fled on foot.  Officers then gave chase on foot.  After a pretty comical escape attempt which included trying to pose as homeowners watering flowers and/or as surprised residents coming out of their homes to see what was going on, the suspects along the way were ultimately apprehended.  However, this isn't the weird part...

Along the way in the foot chase LAPD officers encountered an armed woman who happens to be the wife of the guitarist for the rock band Weezer.  She had apparently come out of her house thinking there was an intruder and she was armed with a 9mm pistol.  As the story goes, police told her to drop the weapon numerous times and she failed to do so.  Police then opened fire striking the woman in the shoulder.  She was later taken into custody (and the hospital) and subsequently charged with "Attempted Murder".

Today, news comes out that she apparently even fired at the cops.  This, based on the recovery of a spent shell casing from the woman at the scene.  (It's unclear if any officers actually saw her fire).

Here's a link to the story...

Wife of Weezer guitarist shot in bizarre incident

I have mixed feelings about this incident.  Of course, the MSM and the LAPD are trying to make it look like this is a cut and dried case, but I'm not so sure it is.  Incidentally, I have no opinion on Weezer's music; I don't think I've ever heard it.  But here's the issue...a bunch of armed people barge onto your property, some of them clearly armed.  Amid the chaos, a person likely won't have time or situational awareness enough to distinguish good guys from bad guys.  There is a high likelihood a person might assume everyone are bad guys and conduct themselves accordingly.  (And yes, 'assuming' things with firearms is not a good thing, but it can happen).

An 'Attempted Murder' conviction is a big deal, complete with likely decades of imprisonment in a federal pen.  Likewise, it is also a felony.  Unless it can be proven this woman went outside with the intent to shoot some cops, then I would say getting an Attempted Murder conviction is going to be next to impossible (or should be...in a truly 'just' justice system).  Even if she fired the pistol.

Reckless Endangerment maybe, or Brandishing, might be a more appropriate charge.  We also don't know if the woman is legally allowed to have a firearm, but this shouldn't matter to the case of the alleged crime as charged.  Will the DA allow a plea to a lesser charge?  Maybe, but it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

This whole incident really gets into the scenario of law enforcement crashing into your personal space and then not being able to claim self-defense because someone had a badge (which may, or may not, have been visible).

What are your thoughts?

[Michigan Swampbuck]

In Michigan, you can only use deadly force when your life, or the life of others, is clearly threatened and there is no other choice (like fleeing or hiding I guess). Legally, the best situation is when someone has broken into your home and is threatening you with a weapon, so when the cops arrive, the perp lying dead in your home should have an entry wound in the front and a weapon in their hand. A witness to confirm your story would be be a solid self defense case.

[FCD]

Any form of a "Murder" charge (i.e. any charge with the word 'Murder' in it) points strongly to intent  Roughly translated, it means the person accused consciously 'wanted' to kill a person or group of persons.  It means they set out with the sole purpose of inflicting death or grave bodily injury on another person.  The only difference when the word "Attempted" is inserted in front of the charge is that the accused, for whatever reason, failed to accomplish their intended objective.  It is still a form of a Murder charge.  Murder charges are also fairly specific, meaning the perpetrator directed their intent on a specific person or group. 

So, for example, if a person intentionally drives their car into a group of people they don't like, this would be an example of Attempted Murder.  If, on the other hand, a intoxicated person got behind the wheel and drives into a group of people because they lost control of their vehicle, this is more of a Manslaughter type charge (i.e. one without intent).  In order to prove an Attempted Murder charge the DA will have to prove that Shriner (the wife) consciously wanted to kill not just anyone, but rather law enforcement officers in particular.  This seems like a stretch.  The problem is, the MSM and the public at large support and endorse charges like this with their sensational reporting.

I'm not suggesting this woman may not be guilty of a crime, only that the charge of "Attempted Murder" is not a carriage of the laws as written.  She could be guilty of Illegal Possession, Brandishing, Reckless Endangerment and possibly various other crimes, but Attempted Murder is an overly trumped up charge.  This is just another variation of legislation from the bench and/or the justice system (which is another post altogether).  In other words, in Kalifornia guns=bad, so everyone with a gun is automatically a 'murderer'.  This is wrong.  But even that is not really the point here.  On a more situational level, this also brings up subjects like "swatting" and invasions of the wrong property or, in this case, trespassing.  Citizens must be able to reasonably defend themselves, and if this woman didn't consciously 'want' to kill a law enforcement officer, then she shouldn't be charged with "Murder" in any of its forms (basically 1st or 2nd degree).  So, there's kind of a fine line here, and ideally there needs to be an element of reasonability included in the DA's decision making process (not just what will make the best headline and support the biggest political ideology and/or agenda).

[Ksihkehe]

I avoid "professional" interactions with police whenever possible. I think they're dangerous. I routinely see screaming and swearing, along with conflicting or unclear instructions, when police are in situations that require absolute clarity. I don't envy them for the conditions they deal with, but I don't want to be collateral damage.

If they didn't adequately identify themselves, like with no-knock warrants or barging onto property like this, then it should be entirely within the rights of a person (that isn't otherwise committing a felony) to shoot an armed intruder. That would be pretty unreasonable in a place like where I live, but violent crime is virtually nonexistent here.

We'll see what happens. Presumably they have enough money for decent lawyers. If she was acting irresponsibly then she should be held accountable, but so should police. This smells like trumped up charges that can be plead way down or be dropped entirely if she doesn't sue the shit out of them. If they needed to find a shell casing to know she fired at them... what prompted her being shot? If she fired first and somebody heard it, then it would make sense she was shot. If she was shot after being screeched at by people that were intruders on her property, with several people demanding things, I think things are a lot more fuzzy.

Lets see the body cams. Wild that she was shot, but then walked to them to surrender. Odd all around.

[FCD]

Lets see the body cams. Wild that she was shot, but then walked to them to surrender. Odd all around.

I thought the same thing!  She's either one tough gal, or she just got grazed.  I was doubly impressed when she got down on the ground that she was able to do what amounted to a reverse pushup (to lie on her stomach) with a bullet wound to the shoulder.

Then again, LEO's are notoriously bad shots, so it might have just been a superficial wound.