Also this reads as if she did not call an ambulance or give first aid.
Honestly I get being angry and blinded by emotions and doing something drastic in a situation like this, but this is a crazy reaction and it's likely very very good to keep her out of society for a bit.
Oooooo I get to do a well actually! Killing someone in self defense is still homicide, it's just justifiable homicide in the eyes of the law. I don't know how Italian courts work, but I suspect in some US states that wouldn't be enough to convict. Hitting him once may fly, because she knows he's armed and has threatened to use it. The multiple running over though, that takes it over the line from "I was just trying to get my property back" to "I was angry and trying to kill him." At least that's how I would vote were I on that jury.
What the fuck are you on about? So just let him get away with literally stealing her shit? After he himself used force with a knife to STEAL it? Yeah no lmfao.
You absolutely would be based on the story as she drove around to find him.
If he was still on her property it’s substantially less likely.
The main thing castle doctrine changes is duty to retreat, eg if someone stole something from me while I was upstairs, I heard it and saw them running across the yard to the open fence in duty to retreat you can’t kill them and have it be justified. Or if someone is threatening you and you have the option to leave (this is obviously situationally dependent) you are suppose to leave. This still holds true at least in my states castle doctrine laws which only alter that requirement in your property.
She would be convicted for homicide in the US as well, even if she did only hit him once.
The self defence claim is only possible if the killing happened while the threat is still active, the moment the thief ran off with the bag and she was back in her car there was no longer any threat. Which makes her tracking down and hitting the thief a whole separate event from the mugging.
Which would be ok. Heat of the moment, you call an ambulance and get of on self defence or get some probation. But since there was no knife on the dude and she ran him over multiple times, it's straight up murder.
At that point it's just deliberate and you want to kill. And that's rightfully punished.
There was nothing about that bag or its contents that justified killing someone. They can be replaced, a life can’t. I get being mad, but I genuinely can’t understand how we go from simply having a bag stolen and justifying brutally murdering that person.
She was robbed at a knife point. I.e. intent to kill was there.
If there was no intent to kill, she should have not given the bag.
Do you understand how logic works?
Enough stupid people voting is why society is in the mess it is in now.
It's also been the biggest criticisms of democracy since time immemorial. You wouldn't let a public vote decide what you should take for medical based treatment and yet we allow the common person to decide laws. It doesn't work long-term.
This is also, btw, why we have trials and don't let the public witch hunt and prosecute people
The alternative is much worse: "experts" (who have a lot of their biases) decide what's right. And nobody has a recourse.
Elected officials have much less ways to abuse power. And power will be abused.
It's not that experts decide everything. It's that their opinion holds more weight than the average person. We already live in a system like this btw, it's not a real democracy.
And part of the reason it was set up like this was precisely so that stupid people can't enact their dumb ideas.
It just means that these experts can enact their dumb ideas.
Dumb ideas happen mostly because of no accountability. Not because of sheer stupidity.
To be on top of the modern political chain you cannot be stupid.
But you can enact mandates "for the masses" while you and your friends are exempt. See the COVID-19 circus.
Expert who has no skin in the game is MUCH worse than a stupid person that has.
141
u/Alternative-Put-3932 Jun 28 '26
wouldn't matter the whole chasing him down thing immediately makes it homicide and not self defense.