Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Author Topic: Biker shot dead in road rage incident  (Read 43257 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bie

  • Local Mods
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Bike: NER-A-CAR
    Location: Eastern Cape
  • Posts: 3,183
  • Thanked: 519 times
  • Winners never quit, Quitters never win.
Re: Biker shot dead in road rage incident
« Reply #460 on: August 03, 2019, 09:05:42 am »
Well the pathology people confirmed he was shot from behind. That alone does not tie in with the accused version.
Kom ons maak 'n stoffie.
 

Offline OomD

Re: Biker shot dead in road rage incident
« Reply #461 on: August 03, 2019, 10:51:07 am »
The point is that is can be totally justifiable to shoot someone in the back. The law itself says absolutely nothing about shot placement. It simply says you may shoot to prevent life threatening harm. What if you are attacked and the attacker walks back to pick up his gun? Or pick up an axe, or a knife, or even a brick? Or whatever. Do you have to wait for him to face you again before shooting? Certainly not! If your life is in danger you may shoot. Period.

I certainly do not know the details of this case, but if the judge found it justifiable for the victim to be shot in the back then it appears the judge has access to some detail that we do not.

Or are you guys suggesting the judge erred? And if so, would he have knowingly erred? And if so, what would his motivation be to err?
« Last Edit: August 03, 2019, 10:53:43 am by OomD »
 

Offline Vintage_Mania

Re: Biker shot dead in road rage incident
« Reply #462 on: August 03, 2019, 11:31:56 am »
Bie, one can only hope that if the situation was indeed that the deceased was shot in the back while walking back to his bike, that someone would take up the case for fairness.

I find it difficult to believe that this man was shot from behind, and the killer would walk free in a court of SA.

If he threatened the accused that might make a huge difference. Say he told the already assaulted party he is going to get a tyre lever to do more damage, or something along those lines, the retaliation can be deemed justifiable.

*EDIT* - I see OomD already made the point  :thumleft:
« Last Edit: August 03, 2019, 11:33:14 am by Vintage_Mania »
People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day. And doing nothing often leads to the very best kind of something.
 

Online IceCreamMan

  • Pawn star
  • Forum Whore
  • ****
  • Bike: Triumph (all models)
    Location: United Kingdom
  • Posts: 6,395
  • Thanked: 186 times
Re: Biker shot dead in road rage incident
« Reply #463 on: August 03, 2019, 02:12:51 pm »
Bie, one can only hope that if the situation was indeed that the deceased was shot in the back while walking back to his bike, that someone would take up the case for fairness.

I find it difficult to believe that this man was shot from behind, and the killer would walk free in a court of SA.

If he threatened the accused that might make a huge difference. Say he told the already assaulted party he is going to get a tyre lever to do more damage, or something along those lines, the retaliation can be deemed justifiable.

*EDIT* - I see OomD already made the point  :thumleft:

Retaliation? Thatís murder innit?

The law prescribes minimum force to prevent the attack. While there may be scenarios where shooting someone in the back is justifiable donít try doing this at home, just saying.

Swim.Bike.Run.Eat.Sleep
 

Offline Bie

  • Local Mods
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Bike: NER-A-CAR
    Location: Eastern Cape
  • Posts: 3,183
  • Thanked: 519 times
  • Winners never quit, Quitters never win.
Re: Biker shot dead in road rage incident
« Reply #464 on: August 03, 2019, 02:37:43 pm »
The law is clear that you cannot shoot in self defense if the attack has ceased. Witness said Pearce was walking back to his bike and was shot from behind. Firstly that tells us the attack has ceased and corroborated by the pathologists who said the shots came from behind. The issue is not where the shots were placed, the issue is they and the witness statement both prove that the attack was over and the accused had no reason to act in self defense at that point anymore.

Obviously you can shoot someone in the back if that is faceing towards you, but he is firing at you over his shoulder. Then the attack is still in progress and he is perfectly within the law to defend himself. That is however not what happened here.
Kom ons maak 'n stoffie.
 

Offline OomD

Re: Biker shot dead in road rage incident
« Reply #465 on: August 03, 2019, 04:43:16 pm »
The law is clear that you cannot shoot in self defense if the attack has ceased. Witness said Pearce was walking back to his bike and was shot from behind. Firstly that tells us the attack has ceased and corroborated by the pathologists who said the shots came from behind. The issue is not where the shots were placed, the issue is they and the witness statement both prove that the attack was over and the accused had no reason to act in self defense at that point anymore.

Obviously you can shoot someone in the back if that is faceing towards you, but he is firing at you over his shoulder. Then the attack is still in progress and he is perfectly within the law to defend himself. That is however not what happened here.
Well, you only have the witness account to go with, and the judge clearly decided that the attack was not over, so the witness accounts are either wrong or inadmissible. Or the judge erred. Is that what you're saying?
 

Offline Bie

  • Local Mods
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Bike: NER-A-CAR
    Location: Eastern Cape
  • Posts: 3,183
  • Thanked: 519 times
  • Winners never quit, Quitters never win.
Re: Biker shot dead in road rage incident
« Reply #466 on: August 03, 2019, 04:59:30 pm »
The law is clear that you cannot shoot in self defense if the attack has ceased. Witness said Pearce was walking back to his bike and was shot from behind. Firstly that tells us the attack has ceased and corroborated by the pathologists who said the shots came from behind. The issue is not where the shots were placed, the issue is they and the witness statement both prove that the attack was over and the accused had no reason to act in self defense at that point anymore.

Obviously you can shoot someone in the back if that is faceing towards you, but he is firing at you over his shoulder. Then the attack is still in progress and he is perfectly within the law to defend himself. That is however not what happened here.
Well, you only have the witness account to go with, and the judge clearly decided that the attack was not over, so the witness accounts are either wrong or inadmissible. Or the judge erred. Is that what you're saying?

I think I already made it clear that I question the outcome reached by the judge. JMPD's version of ivents were disregarded in favour of the accused version. (not sure exactly what their version was, just that they were taken out by the judge, in favour of the accused) Witness's version which was corroborated by the pathologists' findings were again disregarded in favour of the accused's version. Accused handled Pearce's handgun prior to authorities arriving. Accusations of tampering with a crimescene was made, also brushed off by judge. Too much of the same, it seems.
Kom ons maak 'n stoffie.
 

Offline OomD

Re: Biker shot dead in road rage incident
« Reply #467 on: August 03, 2019, 05:07:03 pm »
The law is clear that you cannot shoot in self defense if the attack has ceased. Witness said Pearce was walking back to his bike and was shot from behind. Firstly that tells us the attack has ceased and corroborated by the pathologists who said the shots came from behind. The issue is not where the shots were placed, the issue is they and the witness statement both prove that the attack was over and the accused had no reason to act in self defense at that point anymore.

Obviously you can shoot someone in the back if that is faceing towards you, but he is firing at you over his shoulder. Then the attack is still in progress and he is perfectly within the law to defend himself. That is however not what happened here.
Well, you only have the witness account to go with, and the judge clearly decided that the attack was not over, so the witness accounts are either wrong or inadmissible. Or the judge erred. Is that what you're saying?

I think I already made it clear that I question the outcome reached by the judge. JMPD's version of ivents were disregarded in favour of the accused version. (not sure exactly what their version was, just that they were taken out by the judge, in favour of the accused) Witness's version which was corroborated by the pathologists' findings were again disregarded in favour of the accused's version. Accused handled Pearce's handgun prior to authorities arriving. Accusations of tampering with a crimescene was made, also brushed off by judge. Too much of the same, it seems.
Noted.  :thumleft: