The Provocative Act Doctrine

[Ray]

Yes, Ray, it is a good idea that they get to use evidence. Such as...

Again, the jury will decide what the facts are based upon the evidence. Newspaper stories are probably not the best basis for forming an opinion.

I read article in the link. And a couple of "such as" items that you didn't mention: "Williams, who gained national acclaim as a 15-year-old after he ran in the Bay to Breakers to raise $40,000 for Lance Kirklin -- wounded during the 1999 bloodbath at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo."

and "Williams, facing a three-year prison sentence for unarmed bank robberies in Danville and Lafayette last year"

It goes to show that evidence (not necessarily newspaper articles) need to be weighed carefully by those involved in the trial.

 

[kaizasosei]

Making statements related to the "trust" one might extend toward one criminal over another criminal certainly is an interesting idea.

isn't that the essence of your initial statement?

well, i wasn't trying to make any big statements but i do think it is important to be able to trust people. i would determine this on a personal basis not getting influenced by what the mainstream considers criminal.
the reason their are judges is to evaluate the degree of criminal activity.

whatever, maybe i went too far with that exclaimation, but seriously, i don't think all criminals can all be considered equal. as humans our spiritual value may be equal, but there are all kinds of people and all kinds of positive and negative actions out there.

i do think it is cool of you to extend such understanding to burglars...no joke. i also always try to be understanding and assume the best of people until they prove me wrong. but i have to say that if i were to find a burglar in my place, i don't know if i would have the possiblity of being nonviolent. technically, i would be only putting myself in more danger. but if i am sure that they are just some kids and not some raging maniac, ofcourse i would exercise mercy and try not to be excessively destructive.

but you can't expect the average person to share your security of handeling a burglar. most people cannot dose their attacks, they either can be destructive or helpless. for most, i think there is no inbetween because it would take expert martialarts ability and some serious nerve. plus, strategically speaking if there are more than one burglar, just as in any fight, in order to defend against them effectively the level of destruction must be increased. either that or let them tie you up or crack your skull. you may be right...maybe spiritually speaking it would be a noble thing to spare lives, taking some injury. but unless you are sure, isn't it a gamble. they could just as well take your life suddenly.

have you even experienced an intruder? have you ever thought you heard something? isn't that in itself a really scary thing?- to think that someone(possibly very prepared) has entered your private space and is up to no good.



j

 

[Keith Kirkendall]

"Reasonably foresee" what? If someone breaks into my home at 4am in the morning, I am not going to have the luxury of time to reasonably assess anything. I would do the same as Mr. Edmonds did...whatever it takes to protect family and self. I will come into agreement and admit that I have no pity for the killed perpetrators. They broke into the house with the intent of obviously committing heinous acts of violence...they got what their actions deserved.

 

[BrandonLucas]

Maybe it would help if there was an updated story on this...the link in the OP doesn't work any longer.