Young man killed in Raleigh shooting; homeowner charged with murder | WNCNLaw & Order | 207330 hits | Aug 08 3:08 pm | Posted by: Delwin Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
|
“We got a bunch of hoodlums out here racing… I am locked and loaded and I am going outside to secure my neighborhood. You need to send PD as quickly as possible. I am going to secure my neighborhood. I am on the neighborhood watch. I am going to have my neighbors with me,” the caller said at 12:50 a.m.
“There is hoodlums out here racing up and down the street. It’s 1 o’clock in the morning, there is some vandalism, they have firearms — and we are going to secure our neighborhood,” he said.
Its the same guy in both calls, there were no weapons recovered from the scene. I'll chalk this one up to racist paranoia. Hopefully justice is served and this yahoo rots in jail.
Are you just hoping that it was or, do you have proof and the reason I ask is because the article said:
I'm pretty sure the term "another caller" normally means someone else.
However pay close attention to the second call, when his wife passes the phone to him he answers "Hello Again."
These were the first 2 calls of 6 made. So why "Hello again" unless he was the unidentified caller from the first call?
Also, he placed the first call, his wife placed the second making her the 2nd caller.
The media was careful not to attribute the first call to him because he did not identify himself and wouldn't give his address in the first call. He likely did not make a statement on the advice of his attorney and rightfully so since the first call is a clear indication of his intention.
However pay close attention to the second call, when his wife passes the phone to him he answers "Hello Again."
These were the first 2 calls of 6 made. So why "Hello again" unless he was the unidentified caller from the first call?
Also, he placed the first call, his wife placed the second making her the 2nd caller.
Maybe but, "hello again" might not even be relevant to what happened. For all we know he could be one of those people who are continually phoning the police to complain about everything from kids on his lawns to police misconduct. Besides they keep referring to the first caller as the neighbourhood watch caller which means they must have some idea who it was especially given that all call numbers are recorded.
Either way, if these guys were street racing there should be other witnesses so, it shouldn't be hard to find out if they were armed and what happened before the guy was shot who, was for some odd reason outside this guys garage.
“I don’t know. I’m upstairs with our children,” the female caller says.
She then gives the phone to what sounds like the same male caller from earlier.
https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2016 ... arage.html
Well sure, he could have been saying hello again because the dispatcher used to be his 4th grade math teacher or any number of ridiculously unlikely scenarios. I was presenting the most likely scenario and based on the fact that first degree murder charges were brought against the man and he is being held without bond, I'd say the police have some degree of confidence in his culpability.
The first is that he left the relative protection of his home to go into his garage confront a group in the darkness beyond. He put his life at risk, instead of doing the smart thing, which is to call 911 and let officers arriving at the scene handle the issue.
But Copley didn’t do the smart thing.
He went out and confronted the group and they started cursing at him.
Copley then says, “they were showing a firearm.”
He didn’t say they threatened him with it or brandished the weapon, and he didn’t consider it a deadly force threat. If he did, he would have fired at the man pointing the gun and would be at most facing a manslaughter charge.
But Copley—clearly the 911 caller referenced in the story—didn’t claim that he was using his shotgun in lawful self-defense. Copley claims that he fired a “warning shot.”
His “warning shot” struck and killed Kouren-Rodney Bernard Thomas.
Copley appears to have indicted himself with 911 calls that were essentially a confession.
You don’t tell the police that you are going to “secure your neighborhood” and then tell the dispatcher that they “better send police quickly” because you’re about to take the law into your own hands.
You never fire a warning shot. Warning shots are illegal nearly everywhere. You’re either justified in firing a shot in self defense at a violent person, or you aren’t authorized in discharging a firearm at all.
Chad Cameron Copley did not want to wait for law enforcement, took the law into his own hands, was ignorant of the applicable laws, and then discharged a weapon when he got over his head.
Kouren-Rodney Bernard Thomas may have been a jerk taunting Copley. He may have been a spectator. He may have been some guy completely unaware of Copley who just happened to walk by when Copley levelled his shotgun and fired.
All we know for sure is that Copley fired a shot that he did not need to fire, and Thomas is dead as a result.
If you’re going to obtain a firearm, folks, you need to know more than just basic firearms safety and manipulation. You need to know explicitly how the laws of self-defense work in your state, and when you may lawfully use a firearm in self-defense.
Quite frankly, if you own a firearm, haven’t been to a defensive firearms class (no a concealed carry certification class doesn’t count), and haven’t read Andrew Branca’s The Law of Self Defense*, then you’re setting yourself up to potentially be the next Chad Copley.
http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/08/08 ... ning-shot/
If the above analysis is correct, it seems even in the US, some sanity prevails.