超级军网美国房主杀死入室偷取食物男孩被判无罪
来源：百度文库 编辑：超级军网 时间：2024/04/28 08:27:39
美国得克萨斯州一名男子杀死一名入室偷取食物的13岁男孩，26日获判无罪。这一裁决在当地引发争议。根据得州法律，房主出于自卫可以对闯入者实施致命打击。这一案件的焦点是，是否存在防卫过当。
去年7月一天夜里，13岁的安吉亚诺和另外3名男孩闯入63岁的冈萨雷斯家中，偷取食物和苏打水。冈萨雷斯发现后不顾4名男孩求饶，用猎枪枪管反复击打他们，随后开枪打死安吉亚诺。据新华社美国得克萨斯州一名男子杀死一名入室偷取食物的13岁男孩，26日获判无罪。这一裁决在当地引发争议。根据得州法律，房主出于自卫可以对闯入者实施致命打击。这一案件的焦点是，是否存在防卫过当。
去年7月一天夜里，13岁的安吉亚诺和另外3名男孩闯入63岁的冈萨雷斯家中，偷取食物和苏打水。冈萨雷斯发现后不顾4名男孩求饶，用猎枪枪管反复击打他们，随后开枪打死安吉亚诺。据新华社
去年7月一天夜里，13岁的安吉亚诺和另外3名男孩闯入63岁的冈萨雷斯家中，偷取食物和苏打水。冈萨雷斯发现后不顾4名男孩求饶，用猎枪枪管反复击打他们，随后开枪打死安吉亚诺。据新华社美国得克萨斯州一名男子杀死一名入室偷取食物的13岁男孩，26日获判无罪。这一裁决在当地引发争议。根据得州法律，房主出于自卫可以对闯入者实施致命打击。这一案件的焦点是，是否存在防卫过当。
去年7月一天夜里，13岁的安吉亚诺和另外3名男孩闯入63岁的冈萨雷斯家中，偷取食物和苏打水。冈萨雷斯发现后不顾4名男孩求饶，用猎枪枪管反复击打他们，随后开枪打死安吉亚诺。据新华社
德克萨斯....该州就是你闯空门之类的人家拿枪打死你白打。这几个男孩吃不饱还是咋的。。。偷这些。德州不算太穷啊？
这肯定是属于故意杀人，对方已经失去抵抗能力了，他还防卫个屁:@ :@ :@
这法官也他妈的脑残
这法官也他妈的脑残
根据得州法律，房主出于自卫可以对闯入者实施致命打击。
冈萨雷斯发现后不顾4名男孩求饶，用猎枪枪管反复击打他们，随后开枪打死安吉亚诺。
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
自卫???[:a9:]
冈萨雷斯发现后不顾4名男孩求饶，用猎枪枪管反复击打他们，随后开枪打死安吉亚诺。
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
自卫???[:a9:]
换句话说，改法无视入侵者的情况，而重点保护房主对于物权及隐私权的维护，不能说这条法律不好，但是该法太不具有普适性了。
猎枪枪管反复击打他们
够狠的啊！
够狠的啊！
米国的规定不熟悉.
国内,如果只是盗窃一般食物,可能有条件认定为紧急避险,这样就涉及到一个很复杂的定性问题:对紧急避险是否适用正当防卫.
正当防卫看似很简单,实际很复杂:如是否可对正当防卫进行反防卫,是否可以对教唆犯防卫,是否可以对间接正犯防卫,是否可以对无限人防卫等等......
国内,如果只是盗窃一般食物,可能有条件认定为紧急避险,这样就涉及到一个很复杂的定性问题:对紧急避险是否适用正当防卫.
正当防卫看似很简单,实际很复杂:如是否可对正当防卫进行反防卫,是否可以对教唆犯防卫,是否可以对间接正犯防卫,是否可以对无限人防卫等等......
我当年的论问写的是逆防卫，结过被一帮老学究以不和谐为名批了半天;P
美国德州最狠，这几个小毛孩事前应该想象。。。保留死刑也是这个州。刑罚总体比较严。
单不说法律了这房主的做法也太过了吧。杀人他就下得了手够狠。
美国法律牛
我国法律规定紧急避险的情况下，是不能采取正当防卫的。
原帖由 马甲1号 于 2008-10-13 20:56 发表
冈萨雷斯发现后不顾4名男孩求饶，用猎枪枪管反复击打他们，随后开枪打死安吉亚诺。
如果在破门瞬间击杀、或者不能评判定情况下击杀，或有可说。
但是在明知对方不构成重大侵害情况下击杀，明显构成故意。
原帖由 梦回秦汉 于 2008-10-13 21:55 发表
我国法律规定紧急避险的情况下，是不能采取正当防卫的。
能否举例说明之？
这个比较雷啊，听说美国是判例法，不知道是一州还是全美，估计这样判下去，德州的入室盗窃什么的可能会绝迹，至于像我们这里的入室抓人家夫妻看黄片的更不可能了！
冈萨雷斯,听这名就像墨西哥那边过来的,很火爆的一个国家唷
美国的地方法律与联邦法律冲突，所以我很不欣赏美国的司法体制。
记得当年有个日本崽，闯人家美国人的院子想问路，结果被房主崩了，也是判无罪。是不是也在德州？
德州啊,保守主义大本营,出现这种极端维护私权的法律并不奇怪
原帖由 longhui 于 2008-10-13 23:49 发表
这个比较雷啊，听说美国是判例法，不知道是一州还是全美，估计这样判下去，德州的入室盗窃什么的可能会绝迹，至于像我们这里的入室抓人家夫妻看黄片的更不可能了！
入室盗窃可能绝迹，只剩下入室杀人。
既然入室便可能被射杀，何不先下手为强。
有个问题，怎么判定被杀者是自愿进入别人家而不是被胁迫进去再杀的，弄不清楚，千万别到别人家去。
LAREDO — A Laredo man charged with murder after shooting and killing an unarmed teenager who broke into the man's mobile home with three other juveniles has been acquitted of the charge.
Eight men and four women Friday found Jose Luis Gonzalez, 63, not guilty of murdering Francisco Anguiano, who was 13 last July when he and his friends illegally entered Gonzalez's mobile home to take what they said were just sodas and snacks.
Gonzalez said he had the juveniles on the ground and was trying to keep them at bay with a shotgun when Anguiano made a sudden movement toward his feet.
Gonzalez perceived the teen to be lunging for him, he testified, and fired the weapon into Anguiano's back, claiming he feared for his life.
The three surviving teens testified that they were subdued on their knees and posed no threat to Gonzalez when he shot Anguiano.
After three hours, the jury sided with the homeowner.
“I thank God and my attorney, the jury and the judge,” Gonzalez said in Spanish after the verdict. “It was a case where it was my life or theirs, and it's a very good thing that (the jurors) decided in my favor.”
Asked if he wanted to send any message to Anguiano's family, Gonzalez said he was sorry for the tragedy but “it was a situation in which I feared for my life.”
Isidro “Chilo” Alaniz, Gonzalez's attorney, said the case was significant for all Laredoans.
“I feel vindicated for Mr. Gonzalez and his family and for all of the homeowners and all of the seniors in Laredo,” he said. “This case has huge implications across the board. We always, always believed in Mr. Gonzalez's right to defend his life and his property.”
He also echoed his client's sentiments and offered his condolences to Anguiano's family.
Assistant District Attorney Uriel Druker told the jury during his closing arguments the case wasn't about homeowners' right to defend themselves but instead about when a person was justified in using deadly force to do so.
“This case was never about homeowners versus criminals. The evidence in this case was compelling enough to show that wasn't the case at all,” he said after the verdict. “I think the message that was revealed is that it's OK for a person to take the law into their own hands.”Anguiano's aunt, who asked not to be identified, said she was disappointed in Alaniz, the future district attorney of Webb and Zapata counties, and with what she perceived as a lack of justice.
“The state fought the case the way it should have,” she said as tears streaked down her face. “There was a sufficient amount of evidence, and I thought that some of the jurors would be a father or a mother, and perhaps they would think about this happening to them.”
Alaniz congratulated the prosecutors from the office he will head next year and said he was impressed with the way they presented “one of the hardest cases” he's ever tried. He said he would continue to be an advocate for seniors and homeowners' rights when he takes office.
The case brings to a close one that divided the public during its weeklong duration.
Eight men and four women Friday found Jose Luis Gonzalez, 63, not guilty of murdering Francisco Anguiano, who was 13 last July when he and his friends illegally entered Gonzalez's mobile home to take what they said were just sodas and snacks.
Gonzalez said he had the juveniles on the ground and was trying to keep them at bay with a shotgun when Anguiano made a sudden movement toward his feet.
Gonzalez perceived the teen to be lunging for him, he testified, and fired the weapon into Anguiano's back, claiming he feared for his life.
The three surviving teens testified that they were subdued on their knees and posed no threat to Gonzalez when he shot Anguiano.
After three hours, the jury sided with the homeowner.
“I thank God and my attorney, the jury and the judge,” Gonzalez said in Spanish after the verdict. “It was a case where it was my life or theirs, and it's a very good thing that (the jurors) decided in my favor.”
Asked if he wanted to send any message to Anguiano's family, Gonzalez said he was sorry for the tragedy but “it was a situation in which I feared for my life.”
Isidro “Chilo” Alaniz, Gonzalez's attorney, said the case was significant for all Laredoans.
“I feel vindicated for Mr. Gonzalez and his family and for all of the homeowners and all of the seniors in Laredo,” he said. “This case has huge implications across the board. We always, always believed in Mr. Gonzalez's right to defend his life and his property.”
He also echoed his client's sentiments and offered his condolences to Anguiano's family.
Assistant District Attorney Uriel Druker told the jury during his closing arguments the case wasn't about homeowners' right to defend themselves but instead about when a person was justified in using deadly force to do so.
“This case was never about homeowners versus criminals. The evidence in this case was compelling enough to show that wasn't the case at all,” he said after the verdict. “I think the message that was revealed is that it's OK for a person to take the law into their own hands.”Anguiano's aunt, who asked not to be identified, said she was disappointed in Alaniz, the future district attorney of Webb and Zapata counties, and with what she perceived as a lack of justice.
“The state fought the case the way it should have,” she said as tears streaked down her face. “There was a sufficient amount of evidence, and I thought that some of the jurors would be a father or a mother, and perhaps they would think about this happening to them.”
Alaniz congratulated the prosecutors from the office he will head next year and said he was impressed with the way they presented “one of the hardest cases” he's ever tried. He said he would continue to be an advocate for seniors and homeowners' rights when he takes office.
The case brings to a close one that divided the public during its weeklong duration.
这个解释是很正常啊，1对4，再加上事主年龄，只要说小鬼乱动，陪审员是不太可能判老头有罪的。
陪审团可能考虑到这几个年轻人有劣迹，事主是一对四，为了保障事主人权，所以做出如此判决。此判决若是被中国学习去了，强行拆迁工作队要死多少人呢？;P
对方已无反抗意图何必要开枪呢?
原帖由 幻海魔刀 于 2008-10-13 17:29 发表
对方已无反抗意图何必要开枪呢?
谁能证明？那几个小鬼可是No Credibility，No Character。考虑到1对4和事主年龄，老实说我也会偏老头，投无罪:D
原帖由 jiangpub 于 2008-10-14 09:11 发表
美国也有小偷入室偷盗,不小心滑倒摔伤,结果控告房主索赔巨款获法院支持.
听说一个偷儿乘房主出外旅游偷窃，结果房门坏了出不来。靠冰箱里的吃喝撑了差不多一周。事后他以入室偷窃被判，同时告房门厂商索赔成功。
原帖由 winters猪猪 于 2008-10-14 09:25 发表
听说一个偷儿乘房主出外旅游偷窃，结果房门坏了出不来。靠冰箱里的吃喝撑了差不多一周。事后他以入室偷窃被判，同时告房门厂商索赔成功。
打911啊