Man shot dead by man who shot dog

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Frohickey, Nov 12, 2003.

  1. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Feb 27, 2003
    Police say neighbor shot dog owner in noise dispute

    Okay, what do you folks think?

    I think that if the facts of the case are exactly as described in the story, that Griffin ought to be charged with Cruelty to Animals, Shooting a Pellet gun within city limits, and 2nd Degree Murder or Manslaughter.

    If Hammock did indeed set on foot into the converted library after breaking the glass, then Griffin should not be charged with 2nd Degree Murder or Manslaughter, but the first two charges should stick.
  2. QCassidy352 macrumors G4


    Mar 20, 2003
    Bay Area
  3. rickvanr macrumors 68040


    Apr 10, 2002
    he should be charged with all three...
    did this happen in a southern state?

    i hope he doesnt get off like that millionaire that did the other day
  4. pivo6 macrumors 68000


    Dec 2, 2002
    It looks like it happened in Colorado. I would charge him with all three as well. Whatever happened to just going next door and asking them to quiet their dog? Was he (Griffin, the shooter) too lazy to go over there? Just senseless.
  5. howard macrumors 68020


    Nov 18, 2002
    if the one had survived the shooting then i'd say shoot them both to clense the human genes of such stupidity...

    just kidding actually...i agree with you too...but man people sure do have tempers. i see people get road rage on teh streets and just scream and swear like crazy, i once saw someone drive up a curb after a pedestrian because he walked out in front of him. ridiculous the things people do
  6. ColoJohnBoy macrumors 65816


    Mar 10, 2003
    Denver, Colorado
    I guess you guys didn't hear the whole story. Griffin, the guy who shot the man and the dog, isn't going to be charged with anything. Colorado has this ridiculous law, the "Make My Day" Law - it justifies the use of force (yes, even lethal force) in the event that someone breaks into your home and either has or might commit a crime there. It's ridiculous. the guy should be tried for manslaughter and sentenced to the full time allowed by law.

  7. MoparShaha macrumors 68000


    May 15, 2003
    San Francisco
    I can see where the dog owner was coming from though. Being one myself, if someone killed my dog, I'd want to kill them. I hope that doesn't make me sound like a crazy violent person, but I think of my dog as one of my best friends. It is such a shame the guy had to die. It should of been the other way around.
  8. XnavxeMiyyep macrumors 65816


    Mar 27, 2003
    I agree with you on that one. I feel the same way about my cat.
  9. Frohickey thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Feb 27, 2003
    Cat? What happened? You dog died before he could eat the cat? :p

    Sorry. :eek:

    I think that we don't have the complete story, as to where Hammock was when he was shot. Either that, or the prosecutor is inept.
  10. alset macrumors 65816


    Nov 9, 2002
    East Bay, CA
    Sometimes killing a police dog can get you tried for killing an officer and I think it's absolutely fair. I would like to see tougher laws on people who harm animals for the sake of cruelty. If anyone hurt my cats I would take that as if they had hurt a member of my family.

  11. Daveman Deluxe macrumors 68000

    Daveman Deluxe

    Jun 17, 2003
    Corvallis, Oregon
    For what it's worth, Hammock was outside Griffin's home when Hammock was shot--hence the sound of glass breaking. Furthermore, I think Griffin should be prosecuted for cruelty to animals, discharging a pellet gun inside city limits, and homicide.
  12. tazo macrumors 68040


    Apr 6, 2003
    Pacific Northwest, Seattle, WA actually
    Why would they do that? That would be the fair, and obvious thing to do :rolleyes: ;)
  13. G4scott macrumors 68020


    Jan 9, 2002
    Austin, TX
    I love our justice system :rolleyes:
  14. candan9019 macrumors regular

    Feb 18, 2003
    Ontario-> Louisiana-> Colorado-> Ontario
    The police said that they have no proof that he did shot the dog and his girlfriend had access to the gun too. And as far as shooting a gun in city limits its hard to call Ault a city or really much of a town, though they may have some law like that. The Weld county DA was kinda upset that they couldn't to anything. I don't think anybody sides with the shooter. Not to mention the guy looks like some insane serial killer.
  15. leet1 macrumors 6502

    Nov 3, 2003

    Thats great law :D
  16. Frohickey thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Feb 27, 2003
    Ah... if they don't have proof, then the situation as it stands is correct. We are still in a 'innocent until proven guilty' mode, unless you are an enemy combatant captured in Afghanistan and currently living in Club Gitmo. :D
  17. panphage macrumors 6502

    Jul 1, 2003
    Well, forensic science should be able to prove w/o a shadow of a doubt who fired the pellet gun. Fingerprints, angle of penetration, and so on, not to mention that the pellet can be tied easily to the specific gun. I've seen forensics specialists match scratch marks on an aluminum door frame to a SPECIFIC screwdriver. The timing of the shooting should be able to clear up the girlfriend vs. dude question, and if not, then the owner of the weapon is usually the one charged. If his weapon shot the dog, he is guilty unless there's reason to beleive it was the girl. As far as shooting his neighbor, again, forensics should show quite easily where the fellow was standing when shot, also whether the 2x4 or shotgun pellet (or buck- or bird-shot) broke the glass. If they aren't charging this *******, they aren't trying. Of course, it could be that weilding a 2x4 ruins that whole 2nd degree murder thing: Self-Defense.
  18. Thanatoast macrumors 65816


    Dec 3, 2002
    That's ****ed up. I don't care if he was being threatened with a wooden board. That guy should be charged with murder. Couldn't the prosecuter have even tried for manslaughter?

    If the board-wielder was on the porch when the paramedics arrived, then the make my day law doesn't even enter into it. The prosecutor should be fired. Griffin should serve time.

  19. cubist macrumors 68020

    Jul 4, 2002
    Muncie, Indiana
    The victim can file a civil suit against the guy, since the law won't prosecute. He should be able to get a great deal of money for injury and damage.
  20. howard macrumors 68020


    Nov 18, 2002
    so the dog is annoying great, its not that hard to go there and talk to your neighbor about it nicely and the problem could be solved in a civil way...but instead he thinks..hey why don't i SHOOT the dog...??!!??

    then the guy next door, is obviously pretty frustrated, i mean the guy just shot his dog, i'd be pretty upset too. but like the other guy, instead of just calling the police on the guy he takes matters in his own hands and confronts him...

    no wonder why we have so many crazy and stupid laws....there are so many crazy and stupid situations that our society gets into that require them.
  21. whooleytoo macrumors 604


    Aug 2, 2002
    Cork, Ireland.
    I agree with you completely, common sense seems to have gone out the window. Both guys are guilty of ridiculous, over the top actions.
  22. wdlove macrumors P6


    Oct 20, 2002
    That is a very sad tragic incident. Hopefully that have a CSI type of forensics team that can determine what actually happend. There must be something that they can charge Griffin with.
  23. Backtothemac macrumors 601


    Jan 3, 2002
    San Destin Florida
    Nope, should be 1st degree. He came to the door with a gun. Granted, the other guy had a 2x4, but the door was closed, and his life was not in danger. Thus, it is a premeditated act.

    1st degree. ****er should fry.
  24. Giaguara macrumors 6502a

    Nov 22, 2002
    he should have just called the police etc animal protection agencies for the unbearable barking. shooting a dog or any animal is not ok.

    but neither a continuous barking is ok.
  25. Frohickey thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Feb 27, 2003
    I don't think it should be first degree.

    Let me just say that somehow the prosecutor doesn't think he's got enough evidence to convict Griffin. That is what is important here. Griffin is innocent. He has not been proven guilty. YET.

    I have gone to the door with a gun.

    Story was this.
    I drive home. Since I only have a one car garage, and its my roommates turn to have the garage that month, I park on the street.
    So, I drive home, pass by my house, make a u-turn and park on the side of the street.
    As I take off my seat belt and grab my laptop bag from the back seat, a guy in an older El Camino drives up. Starts accusing me of following him. He asks if I'm a cop. He asks why I'm following him. He asks that everytime he looks around, he sees *me*. I tell him that I have not been following him. Never seen him before until now. I then walk towards my front door. He is still outside of his El Camino, parked in the middle of the street yelling at me. I see the next door neighbor come out of his house, wonder what is happening. I reach my front door, I go inside.

    A few minutes later, I hear my door bell ring, and voices by my front door. I arm myself, and I answer the front door (without opening it, just looking through the peephole, and yelling through the door). Its the neighbor saying that his friend was drunk.

    But what if it was the drunk guy? What if he was pounding on my door? What if he started smashing the kitchen window, and started going in?

    As you see, just answering the door with a gun doesn't mean its 1st degree.

    PS... after I went inside of the house, and before the neighbor knocked, I called the police station to try and document the fact that I was approached by this guy. There was no crime committed, but I wanted to have a paper trail, just in case, something happened. Luckilly, nothing did.

Share This Page