Deadly Oklahoma home invasion: Getaway driver planned break-in, prosecutors say

[Ikari]

Deadly Oklahoma home invasion: Getaway driver planned break-in, prosecutors say | Fox News

Not 100% sure if I’d trust what the prosecutors say just because they like to get the biggest crimes they can out of crap, but sure, if they can prove it in court. But what took me aback was actually this.

Elizabeth Marie Rodriguez, 21, of Oologah was arrested on three first-degree murder and three first-degree burglary warrants and was jailed without bond, Wagoner County Deputy Nick Mahoney said.

3 counts of 1st degree murder. But a murder didn’t happen. The three kids were shot in an act of legitimate self-defense, that’s not murder. It’s sad, it’s unfortunate, but they arm-robbed a house and were shot dead for it. That’s it, that’s over with.


Everyone is responsible for the consequences of her actions, but she didn’t pull the trigger, and I’m thinking that this is a classic case of government over prosecution. In fact she got three counts of burglary. Did she burglar 3 homes? Now I get OK has a law stating

Oklahoma law allows a person to be charged with murder for playing some role in a crime in which people are killed, even if the person does not take part in the actual killing.

But I think this is wrong. Yes, they made a choice of action which resulted in legitimate use of force being used against them. But one shouldn’t be charged for murder less they murdered someone. And in self-defense, there is no murder. She rightly belongs in jail, but punishment needs to fit the crime and we need to have reasonable punishment and a proper justice system. Now if she had set these kids up to be killed by the home-owners, then for sure. But if it was just, as it seems, a case of self-defense, then the kids are dead because they were stupid and armed robbed a place, and the chick didn’t commit murder herself.


They get a charge of breaking and entering, or crimes that were committed by this gang during the break-in, if she planned it then there’s likely some additional charges that can come there, OK. But nothing made up. Let the punishment fit the crime.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I agree. I am against these types of laws. Prosecute people for the actions they actually performed.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

It's Oklahoma. I don't trust anything from that state.

 

[Bodi]

Deadly Oklahoma home invasion: Getaway driver planned break-in, prosecutors say | Fox News

Not 100% sure if I’d trust what the prosecutors say just because they like to get the biggest crimes they can out of crap, but sure, if they can prove it in court. But what took me aback was actually this.





3 counts of 1st degree murder. But a murder didn’t happen. The three kids were shot in an act of legitimate self-defense, that’s not murder. It’s sad, it’s unfortunate, but they arm-robbed a house and were shot dead for it. That’s it, that’s over with.


Everyone is responsible for the consequences of her actions, but she didn’t pull the trigger, and I’m thinking that this is a classic case of government over prosecution. In fact she got three counts of burglary. Did she burglar 3 homes? Now I get OK has a law stating





But I think this is wrong. Yes, they made a choice of action which resulted in legitimate use of force being used against them. But one shouldn’t be charged for murder less they murdered someone. And in self-defense, there is no murder. She rightly belongs in jail, but punishment needs to fit the crime and we need to have reasonable punishment and a proper justice system. Now if she had set these kids up to be killed by the home-owners, then for sure. But if it was just, as it seems, a case of self-defense, then the kids are dead because they were stupid and armed robbed a place, and the chick didn’t commit murder herself.


They get a charge of breaking and entering, or crimes that were committed by this gang during the break-in, if she planned it then there’s likely some additional charges that can come there, OK. But nothing made up. Let the punishment fit the crime.

So she is the get-a-way driver... the three burgle and are shot dead... and she is charged with their murders even though they were not murdered?

If I have that correct that is crap.

 

[Bodi]

It's Oklahoma. I don't trust anything from that state.

Seriously... did you see the Thunder blow that 3-1 lead vs Golden State last year?

 

[Fishking]

But I think this is wrong. Yes, they made a choice of action which resulted in legitimate use of force being used against them. But one shouldn’t be charged for murder less they murdered someone. And in self-defense, there is no murder. She rightly belongs in jail, but punishment needs to fit the crime and we need to have reasonable punishment and a proper justice system. Now if she had set these kids up to be killed by the home-owners, then for sure. But if it was just, as it seems, a case of self-defense, then the kids are dead because they were stupid and armed robbed a place, and the chick didn’t commit murder herself.


They get a charge of breaking and entering, or crimes that were committed by this gang during the break-in, if she planned it then there’s likely some additional charges that can come there, OK. But nothing made up. Let the punishment fit the crime.

Agreed. There was no murder so she should not be charged with murder. Multiple counts of attempted burglary? Sure. I mean...if I reaaaaaaaally wanted to stretch it I could at best twist my logic up to give her manslaughter.

 

[Vox]

Agreed. There was no murder so she should not be charged with murder. Multiple counts of attempted burglary? Sure. I mean...if I reaaaaaaaally wanted to stretch it I could at best twist my logic up to give her manslaughter.

There was no burglary. It was armed home invasion.

Justifiable homicide is murder.

She caused three murders.

Thus she is culpable......ESPECIALLY since she initiated the second home invasion because, as she said, they didn't get enough loot the first time.

When they went back the home was prepared for the second invasion and blew the bastards away.

Thus she's guilty.......screw her, let her rot in prison.

:2usflag:

 

[Fishking]

Justifiable homicide is murder.

(0.o) que?

 

[WillyPete]

So she is the get-a-way driver... the three burgle and are shot dead... and she is charged with their murders even though they were not murdered?

If I have that correct that is crap.

I'm no lawyer, but I believe that is called felony murder. Those deaths were a result of a felony, so people who were involved in committing it are culpable.

It's not intuitive, sure, but she was in a position to prevent those deaths.

Found a link to OK's jury instruction for felony murder here.

Has a pretty straightforward explanation, if you can read legalese.

 

[TurtleDude]

So she is the get-a-way driver... the three burgle and are shot dead... and she is charged with their murders even though they were not murdered?

If I have that correct that is crap.

Its called the felony murder rule. to hammer those who engage in violent felonies even if the person(s) killed Just needed killing

 

[TurtleDude]

I'm no lawyer, but I believe that is called felony murder. Those deaths were a result of a felony, so people who were involved in committing it are culpable.

It's not intuitive, sure, but she was in a position to prevent those deaths.

Found a link to OK's jury instruction for felony murder here.

Has a pretty straightforward explanation, if you can read legalese.

right you are-it is controversial but you are 100% correct

 

[TurtleDude]

(0.o) que?

Justifiable homicide that is part of a felony is a death that can be prosecuted even if not against the guy who capped the mopes

 

[Bodi]

I'm no lawyer, but I believe that is called felony murder. Those deaths were a result of a felony, so people who were involved in committing it are culpable.

It's not intuitive, sure, but she was in a position to prevent those deaths.

Found a link to OK's jury instruction for felony murder here.

Has a pretty straightforward explanation, if you can read legalese.

I understand that well... still a retarded law.

 

[Bodi]

Its called the felony murder rule. to hammer those who engage in violent felonies even if the person(s) killed Just needed killing

Yeah. Got it. Understood. Been that way for a long time... still... in this case it is stupid.

 

[Port & Starboard]

If it gets her off the street, I don't give a damn what they call it.

 

[WillyPete]

I understand that well... still a retarded law.

If we agree that she deserves some form of enhanced punishment because people died as part of the crime she helped commit, then the rest is semantics.

 

[Vox]

All those who seek to ban modern rifles should take note:

The real story here is not the murder rap, (which is correct and routine) but the FACT that if the intended victim hadn't had a modern rifle (the AR-15) he would be dead and the three thugs would be alive.

That's the justification for ownership of modern rifles. In a home invasion by multiple attackers......the only weapon that gives the homeowner a real chance of survival is the modern rifle.

The skilled use of a modern rifle by a well-prepared and courageous citizen is the reason this attack had a happy ending.

That's why three thugs are dead and the intended victim is alive.

We should also note that the "Stand Your Ground" laws contain provisions to prevent the relatives of the thugs from suing the homeowner that was forced to remove the infestation.

Thus is demonstrated the wisdom of good legislation.

:2usflag:

 

[Bodi]

If we agree that she deserves some form of enhanced punishment because people died as part of the crime she helped commit, then the rest is semantics.

We don't agree because I have no idea what you mean by enhanced punishment...

 

[WillyPete]

We don't agree because I have no idea what you mean by enhanced punishment...

Enhanced punishment as in "greater than the usual" punishment for a home invasion\robbery, because people died while she was committing it.

Do you think it would be appropriate if these deaths were considered and counted negatively against her when her sentence is determined (presuming a conviction?)

 

[Cryptic]

So she is the get-a-way driver... the three burgle and are shot dead... and she is charged with their murders even though they were not murdered?

If I have that correct that is crap.

Yes, you have it right. She, however, is being charged with causing their deaths. In effect, she murdered them by directly placing them in a situation where lethal force against them was justified.

Though I am not a big fan of these "Party To" type laws (either one performed the criminal action, or they did not) and their various derivatives such as this seems to be, such laws are place in some or many states in the U.S. As a side note, Texas also has Party to laws but prosecutors here are said to be using the concept less and less frequently.

 

[notquiteright]

All those who seek to ban modern rifles should take note: The real story here is not the murder rap, (which is correct and routine) but the FACT that if the intended victim hadn't had a modern rifle (the AR-15) he would be dead and the three thugs would be alive. That's the justification for ownership of modern rifles. In a home invasion by multiple attackers......the only weapon that gives the homeowner a real chance of survival is the modern rifle. The skilled use of a modern rifle by a well-prepared and courageous citizen is the reason this attack had a happy ending. That's why three thugs are dead and the intended victim is alive.
We should also note that the "Stand Your Ground" laws contain provisions to prevent the relatives of the thugs from suing the homeowner that was forced to remove the infestation. Thus is demonstrated the wisdom of good legislation.

Silly alternate facts- here is the real story, armed citizen vs 3 thugs without firearms. A pistol would have been as effective, maybe a bit handier depending on the hallways, etc. I'm using my 45 for interior defense and not my AR, and as a grunt i trained far more with an M16a1 than the old 1911.

it is a 'win' for the pro firearms folks, why puck it up with silly rhetoric... eace

 

[Spartacus FPV]

No the felony murder rule isn't a stupid law, if someone would still be alive if not for the crime you intended to commit, its your fault whether or not you pulled the trigger.

Good riddance to that scum.

 

[blackjack50]

Deadly Oklahoma home invasion: Getaway driver planned break-in, prosecutors say | Fox News

Not 100% sure if I’d trust what the prosecutors say just because they like to get the biggest crimes they can out of crap, but sure, if they can prove it in court. But what took me aback was actually this.





3 counts of 1st degree murder. But a murder didn’t happen. The three kids were shot in an act of legitimate self-defense, that’s not murder. It’s sad, it’s unfortunate, but they arm-robbed a house and were shot dead for it. That’s it, that’s over with.


Everyone is responsible for the consequences of her actions, but she didn’t pull the trigger, and I’m thinking that this is a classic case of government over prosecution. In fact she got three counts of burglary. Did she burglar 3 homes? Now I get OK has a law stating





But I think this is wrong. Yes, they made a choice of action which resulted in legitimate use of force being used against them. But one shouldn’t be charged for murder less they murdered someone. And in self-defense, there is no murder. She rightly belongs in jail, but punishment needs to fit the crime and we need to have reasonable punishment and a proper justice system. Now if she had set these kids up to be killed by the home-owners, then for sure. But if it was just, as it seems, a case of self-defense, then the kids are dead because they were stupid and armed robbed a place, and the chick didn’t commit murder herself.


They get a charge of breaking and entering, or crimes that were committed by this gang during the break-in, if she planned it then there’s likely some additional charges that can come there, OK. But nothing made up. Let the punishment fit the crime.

Racketeering. Sort of. She should be charged with everything the 3 would be charged with. I have no sympathy for her though. Piece of **** should get a long time in prison.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[notquiteright]

It's Oklahoma. I don't trust anything from that state.

Aww I was born and live in Oklahoma....

The law has been used quite a bit in a wide variety of situations. An officer responding to a felony call hits, gets hit, someone dies- it's on the felon. A burglar broke into the home of a widow (her husband had heavy pain killers for his last year of life), she kills him, the driver is charged with murder.

The woman in question gave a rather open TV interview- she admits planning the job, sending the boys back in for more and driving away when she heard shots. kinda damning to say the least...

The law is what it is, like our child prostitution, within 1,000' of a church, school, playground laws... they have been upheld on appeal... eace

 

[<alt>doxygen]

I think living in a town named "Oologah" might make me insane, but it wouldn't turn me into a killer.

Agree with the OP.