Manslaughter charges filed after kill shot fired 8 minutes post invasion. Wild story out of chesterfield MA.

[appraiser]

If the first shot kills is the next 15 ok?
Asking for a friend

Once the threat is stopped, you have no legal right to keep shooting.

joking or not, the appearance of stopping after the threat is neutralized by the judicious use of a firearm vs unloading the mag is the IMHO IANAL difference between a legal use of deadly force vs depraved indifference

 

[PaulR]

From the article back up in post #1:

“We contend you can hear the first gunshot,” he said. After 8½ minutes, the girlfriend can be heard screaming that another shot has been fired, [First Assistant District Attorney Steven] Gagne said, though audio evidence of the shot is unclear.​

​

And from the Masslive story (Chesterfield man released on bail in December shooting death):

“It is our theory that Mr. Letendre remained on the ground and was still on the ground at the time that Mr. Camp delivered the second shot to his head,” Gagne said.​

Ah, so conjecture.
Still, the story reads to the public right now as:
1st shot = Self defense
2nd shot = crime of passion
[flame suit on]

 

[Picton]

Ah, so conjecture.
Still, the story reads to the public right now as:
1st shot = Self defense
2nd shot = crime of passion
[flame suit on]

It's a bit more than "conjecture." It's evidence presented to the grand jury. And yes, I know, a DA can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, yada yada, but if they present evidence there, it's going to come up again at trial. So it's not like it's spun out of cotton candy.

I think you're spot on with your "story," and absent further evidence, it might be more than a story. But, as with everything else in our world in 2023, "the truth" won't matter. Peoples' minds tend to be made up fast, and it's difficult to change them. Especially when contradictory evidence can easily be dismissed as "iT's A CoNsPiRaCy!!!!"

And who knows? Maybe it is. But maybe it's not.

 

[Dennis in MA]

If the first shot kills is the next 15 ok?
Asking for a friend

oooh, that's a property-crime issue at that point. When you die, you cease to be a person and your body becomes chattel. It's owned by your heirs. I would say they have a case against you defacing their property but they have to prove you did it purposely and weren't just mag-dumping in panic. And I assume it's all civil court at that point.

Although "defacing a corpse" has a ring of "yeah, that law is on the books" truth to it. I mean, if you sexually assaulted the body after - that's a crime. So. . . . .

 

[BJones]

I heard that the second shot came from the grassy knoll ...

 

[Nick Fury]

I’d be more glad that, you are more likely to not make the rookie mistakes this guy did. That’s literally 95% of his pain, not the state or its dumb laws.

Yeah I don’t care how upstanding this guy is claimed to be the optics on this one is real bad…

 

[Nick Fury]

It's a bit more than "conjecture." It's evidence presented to the grand jury. And yes, I know, a DA can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, yada yada, but if they present evidence there, it's going to come up again at trial. So it's not like it's spun out of cotton candy.

This is absolutely the case. I sat on one and a juror asked the DA if she really believed the mom was actually trying to kill her kid why not go for a murder charge instead of reckless endangerment. The DA says because she didn’t think that one would stick. When the reality was not one single indicator of anything but an overwhelmed mother trying to gain control of a typical situation.

No consideration of truth or facts just raw emotion behind the wheel. The court of law is no place you want to go for justice these days…

 

[M1911]

Man, I'm so glad I live in Kentucky.

I don't have to wait until I'm on the ground getting my head kicked in, or until an intruder is already in my home to engage with deadly force.

The laws regarding deadly force are similar across most states -- you can only use deadly force if you are in immediate danger of death or grave bodily injury and once that threat stops, you must stop using deadly force.

 

[TLB]

Yeah good luck with that, no it’s not. Although I would hazard a guess the margins are better in other places, no state is going to let you plug a guy that’s already on the ground inop/out. Of course we’re assuming that’s true and I’m not really sure that it is. States/prosecutors love to fill in the blanks in a narrative when they can get away with it.

I'm not buying any of the narrative in the media so far. It's fed to them by the prosecution.

 

[Uzi2]

The laws regarding deadly force are similar across most states -- you can only use deadly force if you are in immediate danger of death or grave bodily injury and once that threat stops, you must stop using deadly force.

A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.Effective: July 12, 2006History: Created 2006 Ky. Acts ch. 192, sec. 2, effective July 12, 2006

Please, don't tell me the laws I live under every day. This is not a liberal shithole state and the laws and juries do not work in favor of criminals.

 

[M1911]

A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.Effective: July 12, 2006History: Created 2006 Ky. Acts ch. 192, sec. 2, effective July 12, 2006

Please, don't tell me the laws I live under every day. This is not a liberal shithole state and the laws and juries do not work in favor of criminals.

Yes. But when the person who illegally entered your home is flat on his face, bleeding out on the floor, even in KY you will be in trouble if you shoot them in the back of the head.

 

[Junior314]

That's gonna be a not guilty for me if I were on the jury.

 

[Reptile]

Anyone have Twitter?

Please let Andrew Branca know about this case!

This is going to be a huge story!!!

https://twitter.com/LawSelfDefense?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

 

[Varmint]

Massachusetts discourages self-reliance

The cops didn’t to mind the first shot, it was the second shot to back of the head 8 minutes later. That gets you jail in most states Id guess. You also can’t shoot the guy again while the bambalance is taking him away.

 

[Varmint]

Do not be deceived by the "first shot was considered self defense".

It is VERY likely that this prosecutions position would be quite different if there were not a second shot. With the second shot, conceding the first shot was legit is a strategy to show a fair and balanced approach, NOT an indication that they state would have accepted the first shot as self defense if they did not have another attack surface for a charge.

Objection: council is speculating

 

[Varmint]

Yeah, a guess is that invader was running his mouth and managed at length to convince the defender that he very much needed to be dispatched forthwith, like Zec in the first Jack Reacher movie.



Back of the head makes it hard to construct a believable cover story, so hard it almost makes me reach for an innocent explanation, like:

MY FABRICATED STORY: "I'd shot him once and he was on the ground. I was holding him at gunpoint when he started trying to get up. I told him to stop, stay on the ground or I'd shoot him again, but he rolled over on hands and knees facing away from me and was starting to stand up. All the while I'm shouting at him to stay down or I'll shoot. He started to stand, still facing away from me, and I shot him."

He got up and was doing a Bruce Lee style spin kick when I shot him.

 

[meh]

He got up and was doing a Bruce Lee style spin kick when I shot him.

Yeah, they seem to be basing a lot on the premise that Letendre was incapacitated. I presume this is based on what the medical examiner reported, but we haven't even heard what the only eyewitness to the second shot has to say about it. At this point I don't think we even know if Camp gave them a statement. Based on what little we know, there are a lot of possibilities. There's a traffic stop video somewhere that shows a perp getting out of his car with a handgun and then opening fire. The cop fires back and manages to hit him, I think more than once, but you wouldn't know it from the dash cam video. There wasn't even a flinch or visible evidence of it. The perp moved quickly and fluidly, ran back to his car, got in, and drove off. He died from the gunshots and crashed somewhere down the road (not in view of the dash cam).

 

[Picton]

Yeah, they seem to be basing a lot on the premise that Letendre was incapacitated. I presume this is based on what the medical examiner reported, but we haven't even heard what the only eyewitness to the second shot has to say about it. At this point I don't think we even know if Camp gave them a statement. Based on what little we know, there are a lot of possibilities.

This is very true.

But that's the gamble of Miranda rights. Camp is wise to keep his mouth shut, but if the cops draw the wrong conclusion as a result? He needs to step up and testify. Except that that opens him up to cross-examination.

These are the dilemmas people get themselves into sometimes.

 

[Tartakovsky]

Yeah, they seem to be basing a lot on the premise that Letendre was incapacitated. I presume this is based on what the medical examiner reported, but we haven't even heard what the only eyewitness to the second shot has to say about it. At this point I don't think we even know if Camp gave them a statement. Based on what little we know, there are a lot of possibilities. There's a traffic stop video somewhere that shows a perp getting out of his car with a handgun and then opening fire. The cop fires back and manages to hit him, I think more than once, but you wouldn't know it from the dash cam video. There wasn't even a flinch or visible evidence of it. The perp moved quickly and fluidly, ran back to his car, got in, and drove off. He died from the gunshots and crashed somewhere down the road (not in view of the dash cam).

Look at the story of Officer Timothy Gramins in Skokie, IL who now carries 145 rds on him. He shot the perp 14 times, 6 of which in fatal locations.

Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job

Before the call that changed Sergeant Timothy Gramins’ life forever, he typically carried 47 rounds of handgun ammunition on his person while on duty

www.police1.com

 

[M1911]

Look at the story of Officer Timothy Gramins in Skokie, IL who now carries 145 rds on him. He shot the perp 14 times, 6 of which in fatal locations.

Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job

Before the call that changed Sergeant Timothy Gramins’ life forever, he typically carried 47 rounds of handgun ammunition on his person while on duty

www.police1.com

Skokie, IL. That's a safe suburb, right next to where I grew up. Crazy things can happen anywhere.

 

[Lank]

All he needs to do is declare themselves trans binary non fluid and they\them/Zir will walk

 

[appraiser]

Skokie, IL. That's a safe suburb, right next to where I grew up. Crazy things can happen anywhere.

so he carries 2 33 round glock sticks in his vest.

I'd rather have 4 17 round mags with plus 2 extensions that I know are going to be dependable and not so long as to make moving with the gun hard.... like his attempts at ricochet shots under the car.

I'm not a fan of those 33 round magazines, and in a G26 which is his back up gun I know for a fact that they don't work well in that short grip. FTF is common.

 

[drgrant]

so he carries 2 33 round glock sticks in his vest.

I'd rather have 4 17 round mags with plus 2 extensions that I know are going to be dependable and not so long as to make moving with the gun hard.... like his attempts at ricochet shots under the car.

I'm not a fan of those 33 round magazines, and in a G26 which is his back up gun I know for a fact that they don't work well in that short grip. FTF is common.

Does it actually say that in the article? I find that hard to believe that somebody would actually carry those f****** things unless they were running a PCC or something

 

[appraiser]

Does it actually say that in the article? I find that hard to believe that somebody would actually carry those f****** things unless they were running a PCC or something

yes it does....

 

[appraiser]

Before the shooting, Gramins routinely carried 47 rounds of handgun ammo on his person, including two extra magazines for his Glock 21 and 10 rounds loaded in a backup gun attached to his vest, a 9 mm Glock 26.


Now unfailingly he goes to work carrying 145 handgun rounds, all 9 mm. These include three extra 17-round magazines for his primary sidearm (currently a Glock 17), plus two 33-round mags tucked in his vest, as well as the backup gun. Besides all that, he’s got 90 rounds for the AR-15 that now rides in a rack up front.


Paranoia?


Gramins shook his head and said “Preparation.”

 

[Tartakovsky]

Jesus Christ, guys. Wrong takeaway. The point is that the perp was shot 13 times already and still coming at the guy. Typical NES to start bickering about the cop‘s load out.

 

[Tartakovsky]

Before the shooting, Gramins routinely carried 47 rounds of handgun ammo on his person, including two extra magazines for his Glock 21 and 10 rounds loaded in a backup gun attached to his vest, a 9 mm Glock 26.


Now unfailingly he goes to work carrying 145 handgun rounds, all 9 mm. These include three extra 17-round magazines for his primary sidearm (currently a Glock 17), plus two 33-round mags tucked in his vest, as well as the backup gun. Besides all that, he’s got 90 rounds for the AR-15 that now rides in a rack up front.


Paranoia?


Gramins shook his head and said “Preparation.”

Paranoia? Have you been in a gunfight?

 

[appraiser]

Paranoia? Have you been in a gunfight?

I'm just quoting the article

 

[drgrant]

Jesus Christ, guys. Wrong takeaway. The point is that the perp was shot 13 times already and still coming at the guy. Typical NES to start bickering about the cop‘s load out.

Lol nobody was bickering I just asked a question.... there was no malice in it to @appraiser

 

[appraiser]

None taken