Meramec River Shooting

[Old plug]

This discussion can go on forever. But i can guarantee you there is a lot of other things involved. I used to help a JAG where I worked research a legal question that had been in court several times over a period of many years. It was not about murder it was about immigration and benefits. This Castle thing sounds like something that is going to really require a lot of research. The law can say something in black and white but there is other things get involved such as the intend of the law and all prior rulings. If they select the right jury. And the lawyer introduces things in such a way that might show reaching for the gun was a act of aggression. I am thinking hung Jury on this but he could get off scott free.

[hank franklin]

Here are two questions I beleive will be the center of it all.

1. Were they on his Property? The courts will have to have the legal deffinition of the property which is what interest I think most here for the water rights aspect. IF they were as defined by law on his property then.

2. Did they have the rocks in hand and throwing them as Crocker contends? If so ( and that will be for the jury to decide ) then he would have justification under the law for self defense, there is no mandate to retreat that I saw in it.

Should he have withdrawn is moot as there is no mandate to retreat unless i missed it.

Were they on his property? Yes. Did they have a right to be there? Yes.

Mmmmm, interesting. Therein lies the rub.

Who was the aggressor? Sounds like Crocker to me. Floaters stop to pee like hundreds if not thousands before them. Crocker shoots near them. Uh-oh.

Floaters don't leave. Crocker now is really pissed and goes down to confront them. Crocker still very much the aggressor. By his own words, I got the gun, I'm in control here.

Floaters STILL don't leave. Now what? Crocker can shoot a few more times in the air and call the cops, or go down to sort things out himself.

Lesson to the masses: Taking a gun into a crowd of drunks very likely will end badly.

Crocker no doubt was risking getting himself killed when he walked into that mess. It's likely he did need to defend himself by the time it got that far. But he put himself in that position.

[fishinwrench]

It's going to be interesting how they pick a jury on this one....

Have you ever enjoyed floating a river? Yes. "You're out".

Are you, or anyone close to you a property owner? Yes. "You're out".

I don't believe this will ever go to trial, the lawyer(s) will bleed him dry of all available funds and property before it ever gets to trial and he'll have no option but to agree to a plea bargain.

[Larry Eby]

^{We've become frustrated with the situation because we are trying to rationalize or place logic where it doesn't exist. Why this happened? It's a situation where we attempt to affix reason to unreasonable people. Alcohol and ignorance is nothing new.}

[Old plug]

Just remember one thing it is the states responsibility to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. You talk all the stuff about what he did and the prosecution witnesses can say he done it. But they are witnesses for the prosecution. They will be cross examined by the defense lawyer. And when he's done if he is any good the jury is going to have doubts about they thought they seen and didn't see or know while under the influence of alcohol. Also defense witnesses. Are biased in there opinion of what happened. When you hear stuff like the victim was try to cool things down and reached for the gun to push it away. Well who said so??? A prosecution witness is who. This small time county prosecutor better be better than i think he might be.

[Quillback]

Yep the prosecution is going to have a tough case. If it goes to trial. Could be a plea bargain, especially if the prosecution thinks they have a weak case.

[Gavin]

Think he's charged with 2nd Degree Murder...Thats a ten year minimum, cost of a trial, and no guarantee of aquittal...Thinking Voluntary Manslaughter and 5-10 years is the best this Crocker fellow could hope for. His life is pretty much over, regardless.

[Mitch f]

Agree with Gavin

There were too many witnesses who saw him acting like a wild man. The dude was waiting like a black widow spider to run someone off his land....with a gun I might add.

[Old plug]

Thats all unproven is the problem. And if the witnesses were drunk the defense can kind of make them look bad. The thing is not were they drunk but were they drinking. Fom he ou cantear them up pretty good. MAYBE. I sm not trying todefend him. I just think it coukd go either way depending on the expertice ofthe lawyers. I got to now go get ready to go to O fallon tomorrow I have to unload a cubic yard of turkey compost, putthetrsilor away. Gowast the truckandthetruck bed, load up a restored chest of drawer for my youngest granddaughter that has been in the family for about 120 yrs., after all thst i have to hosta plants to move. Then after than if i can still move my arms i will go fidhing with total resolve to beat Wrench to Some of his fish.

[fishinwrench]

Then if i can still move my arms i will go fishing with total resolve to beat Wrench to some of his fish.

They'll be waitin'