Rare robbery case brings cries of racism. The associated piss sure can write a headline can’t they.
Three young black men break into a white man’s home in rural Northern California. The homeowner shoots two of them to death
So far so good. Two out a three ain’t bad, but next time remember, sight alignment, sight picture and trigger control and you’ll be sure to get that third goblin too.
— but it’s the surviving black man who is charged with murder.
As opposed to the racist homeowner who is the obvious criminal here, right?
In a case that has brought cries of racism from civil rights groups, Renato Hughes Jr., 22, was charged by prosecutors in this overwhelmingly white county under a rarely invoked legal doctrine that could make him responsible for the bloodshed.
Well there’s part of the problem ya simperin’ idjut. If the law was invoked a little more often there might be fewer goblins running loose causing the bloodshed. I am however surprised that they haven’t blamed the gun yet. Must be something even juicer to go after.
“It was pandemonium” inside the house that night, District Attorney Jon Hopkins said. Hughes was responsible for “setting the whole thing in motion by his actions and the actions of his accomplices.”
Common sense from the District Attorney. Can’t let that stand unchallenged can we.
Prosecutors said homeowner Shannon Edmonds opened fire Dec. 7 after three young men rampaged through the Clearlake house demanding marijuana and brutally beat his stepson. Rashad Williams, 21, and Christian Foster, 22, were shot in the back. Hughes fled.
Hughes was charged with first-degree murder under California’s Provocative Act doctrine, versions of which have been on the books in many states for generations but are rarely used.
The Provocative Act doctrine does not require prosecutors to prove the accused intended to kill. Instead, “they have to show that it was reasonably foreseeable that the criminal enterprise could trigger a fatal response from the homeowner,” said Brian Getz, a San Francisco defense attorney unconnected to the case.
Still more common sense. Even a semi-retarded thug ought to know that people generally don’t cotton to having there homes invade and their family members “brutally beaten”. A “fatal response from the homeowner” is not only expected it should be damn well required. And here come the race baiters in three, two, one…
The NAACP complained that prosecutors came down too hard on Hughes, who also faces robbery, burglary and assault charges. Prosecutors are not seeking the death penalty.
What’s the problem, they aren’t trying to get him to pay a visit to Ol’ Sparky. This way he gets to spend quality time in the California Penal system getting buff, doing quality drugs, and learning how to be a better criminal from the real pros. Sounds to me like he’s getting a lot better deal than his buddies.
The Rev. Amos Brown, head of the San Francisco chapter of the NAACP…
Which makes for impecable credentials to race baiting victimologists everywhere,
and pastor at Hughes’ church, said the case demonstrates the legal system is racist in remote Lake County, aspiring wine country 100 miles north of San Francisco. The sparsely populated county of 13,000 people is 91 percent white and 2 percent black.
Quick math quiz Reverend. Whats 2 percent of 13,000 minus two? Find that offensive and racist? Good. As soon as I hear you call the three thugs who committed the actual CRIME here what they are (or were, hehe), you know criminals, then I will listen to your blathering BS. Won’t necessarily pay any attention, but at least I’ll listen (I’m in a good mood).
Brown and other NAACP officials are asking why the homeowner is walking free.
Because he didn’t commit a crime maybe? Oh I forgot, he’s a white man who shot two black kids. How insensitive of me not to pick up on that. Of course he should be in jail, just for being white, let alone what he did to those pooooor innocent victims of The Man.
Tests showed Edmonds had marijuana and prescription medication in his system the night of the shooting. Edmonds had a prescription for both the pot and the medication to treat depression.
Which explains why the hoods broke in. They wanted the good medicinal herb, not the skunk weed they peddle on the street.
“This man had no business killing these boys,” Brown said.
Of course not. Just a few misunderstood yutes out to have a good time. How dare he interrupt the festivities.
“They were shot in the back. They had fled.”
This is a whole subject in itself. Without going into the exact math and science of recognition, decision making and reaction times, I will categorically state that it is indeed possible for a person to turn away from a person faster than that person can make a decision to shoot and pull the trigger. If you’re interested, check out Dr.Lewinsky and the Force Science Research Centers Tempe Study. This argument is a non starter for me. How the punks were shot don’t matter piss. They had invaded the home and beat a family member. He could have shot them repeatedly in the nuts with bean bag shells before he pumped two rounds into the back of their heads as far as am I concerned.
The district attorney said that race played no part in the charges against Hughes and that the homeowner was spared prosecution because of evidence he was defending himself and his family, who were asleep when the assailants barged in at 4 a.m.
Spared prosecution! Leaving the condescending arrogance of that phrase aside for the moment, prosecution for what?! Now I know that Kalifornistan doesn’t have the Castle Doctrine and isn’t know for respecting an individuals 2nd Amendment rights, but self defense is still nominally legal there, ain’t it?
Edmunds’ stepson, Dale Lafferty, suffered brain damage from the baseball bat beating he took during the melee. The 19-year-old lives in a rehabilitation center and can no longer feed himself.
A beating that severe sounds like a real hate crime to me, except the victim was the wrong color that is.
California’s Provocative Act doctrine has primarily been used to charge people whose actions led to shooting deaths.
However, in one notable case in Southern California in 1999, a man who robbed a family at gunpoint in their home was convicted of murder because a police officer pursuing him in a car chase slammed into another driver in an intersection, killing her.
But I though it was rarely used. Sounds like it’s used a few more times than the BS headline and teaser would lead one to believe huh?
Hughes’ mother, San Francisco schoolteacher Judy Hughes, said she believes the group didn’t intend to rob the family, just buy marijuana. She called the case against her son a “legal lynching.”
As opposed to the illegal lynching your darlin’ son performed on Dale?
“Only God knows what happened in that house,” she said. “But this I know: My son did not murder his childhood friends.”
Said the next nominee for Parent of the Year. No, he may not have pulled the trigger, but he sure as hell created the situation which led to it. He broke into an innocent families home and brutally beat a 19 year old into a vegetative state. And his two “childhood friends” paid for that act, and the decision to commit the act, with their lives. Be grateful your son is alive and can feed his self, and shut the fuck up.