19 year old young lady shot in back of head after seeking help after a car crash

And now the NAACP seems to be mis informing the public:

"It appears this young woman was merely seeking help following a car accident as her cell phone went dead," the group said. "After knocking on a neighbor’s door, instead of being aided in the situation or police called for an investigation, she was shot fatally in the head. Have we become a society where we are no longer our neighbors’ keeper?

I thought she did not live in this area? So how could it be a neighbor?
Source

pavil
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

Making a LOT of assumptions there. It's tragic that someone died. None of us know enough details to figure out what happened. There seems to be a lot of detail missing in the initial reporting we have.

To all here..... I am not saying the shooter isn't at fault here. I just want to point out that things aren't all unicorns and rainbows where you are living in Detroit or even live near Detroit anymore.

The only assumption I am making was that she was in a car accident, which I didnt think was an assumption given that it was reported and is part of the essence of the story. Given the slim odds that after being in a car accident this 19 year olds first thoughts were to rob a house (even though im sure you think that is the most probable scenario) I then went on to list the most probable scenario of what down, outlining most every possibility. Will you at least reply to me on this when more is heard about this story that I am right if I am right?

reply to post by ImaFungi


The car accident was around two hours earlier though. Not like the media at first made it sound, like she crashed outside the house, then went for help. She left the scene of the accident, then showed up on his porch two hours later, at least going by what we know now. What that means, I have no idea. Could be a million things.

They also have not yet gave an indication where the accident happened though. Did it happen close? If so maybe she was drunk, passed out in some bushes, then came to. Maybe she got her head knocked good, and passed out. If it was not close, that makes it more strange I think.

They also haven't given any real info about the accident itself. Was another car involved? Did she ding a parked car, hit a pole, just get stuck in a ditch.

“I’ll confirm that she was in an accident in Detroit and that she left the accident scene, and then some hours transpired” before the shooting, Serwatowski said.

Serwatowski said the shooting occurred about 3:40 a.m. and the accident happened at about 1:30 a.m. He declined to say what police believe McBride was doing before and after the accident.

reply to post by TKDRL


That is interesting surely, I wonder why the police couldnt express more details about the accident? I have been in a car accident before, and was pretty shook up for hours after the impact, it was quite traumatic and I can imagine if I wasnt in a familiar place, at night in dark I would have wondered around like a zombie and then perhaps as a last ditch attempt would approach a home. I understand this train of thought is under the idea that she is innocent (innocent of trying to break into his home). Is there any circumstance that would have justified the shooting of her if she was not innocent like some of the theories speculated by posters such as, she was out drinking/partying or she was responsible for the accident?

reply to post by ImaFungi


Say she was knocked up pretty good by the accident. Maybe the home owner cracked the door with the gun pointed to see who it was and she stumbled into the door. Gun got jarred and that's why it went off. Another thing I was thinking about, the statement here:

“This girl was not shot in the back of the head while leaving the porch,” Serwatowski said “I don’t know where the family is getting this. She was shot in the front of the face, near the mouth.”

It was very vague as well. Was he only negating the shot in the back of the head part, or the whole thing? Maybe she was not even shot on the porch? Maybe it was a few inches in the door and then she fell backwards on the porch. Guess we will have to wait until they make a press release. Their inside sources are either highly unreliable, or don't exist at all.

reply to post by TKDRL


He is then in the wrong for answering the door (at all) with a gun pointed out, instead of asking what the person was doing or wanted. There should have never been that misunderstanding, she is in the wrong if she was not (unless she could not speak) vocalizing her intent, "sir ive been in an accident, please call 911"...this is what I already addressed in my earlier post on this thread. Instead of shoot first, or open door first ask questions later, he should have asked questions first. I dont know if many front doors are soundproof. We are both judging this case with little data we have and attempting to be objective, but based off feelings and opinions, am I wrong in sensing that you are if any more in favor of the homeowner in this case?

reply to post by ImaFungi


I am trying to stay perfectly neutral. Impossible lol. Not ready to condemn either of them.

I am just wondering who lied to the family and why if that is the case. If it's not, I am wondering why the family is making stuff up or lieing. Also wondering the same about the press. They stated that "investigators" confirmed that she was shot in the back of the head. So either everyone is lieing and making stuff up, or there is a source in the department lieing.

Who is making stuff up and why? Would be disturbing to learn that the shooter has some connections to the department that is pulling some strings. Maybe it is some kind of coverup and it is Serwatowski that is lieing. That is another angle that is possible.

reply to post by TKDRL


Yea I dont know, as it goes if she was innocently looking for help, and then knowing the results, what would the law suggest come of the situation?

About the family claiming things, that is most likely pure emotions. Knowing/thinking their daughter as their sweet child, and then becoming emotional upon hearing the news that their innocent love of their life was shotgun blasted to the face and they will never see them again. That is harsh, it is a bummer when someone dies that didnt have to. If I got the news that something like this occurred to my sister I cant imagine the emotions and infuriation. However if the law dictates that he is justified in his actions no matter the situations, that being; if someone comes onto your porch you can shoot them, then I would of course be forced to accept that law. If this occurred to your daughter would you suck it up and get over it or would you want justice, and does this situation deserve justice...if she was innocently seeking help?

I mean this is a tough ethics situation, can you expect someone to forgive someone for an accident including death, or is this the idea of manslaughter. If she was innocently seeking help, what kind of justice could you expect for an accident such as this? Should a person be punished for falsely assuming their life was in danger and then defending their life (we can use the zimmerman trial as a recent reference), or is it always acceptable to assume ones life is in danger, therefore one may always at any time for any reason defend their life with lethal force?

reply to post by ImaFungi


It's hard really. I am sick of legal mumbojumbo, we need to pass a law telling them laws need to be written in a way that normal people can understand them clearly. Of course that would mean that liars will be less needed, I don't see that happening anytime soon unfortunately.

Michigan Castle Doctrine

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2), it is a rebuttable presumption in a civil or criminal case that an individual who uses deadly force or force other than deadly force under section 2 of the self-defense act has an honest and reasonable belief that imminent death of, sexual assault of, or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another individual will occur if both of the following apply:

(a) The individual against whom deadly force or force other than deadly force is used is in the process of breaking and entering a dwelling or business premises or committing home invasion or has broken and entered a dwelling or business premises or committed home invasion and is still present in the dwelling or business premises, or is unlawfully attempting to remove another individual from a dwelling, business premises, or occupied vehicle against his or her will.

(b) The individual using deadly force or force other than deadly force honestly and reasonably believes that the individual is engaging in conduct described in subdivision (a).

I think that would mean if she tried to push her way in, or fell into the door making him think she was trying to push her way in, it might be justified.

It's really a hard line to try to draw, on one hand, you want to be able to defend yourself and your home. That's a given for most people. On the other hand, you don't want people shooting others for no good reason either.

Detriot seems to be crumbling, and people have good reason to be worried about their safety, but at what point does being vigilant, become being paranoid?

We really don't got a lot of fact to go on though, given all the bad information already come out, I don't trust anything of what was reported before the detective gave an official statement under his name.

reply to post by TKDRL


very well said. when i first heard this and posted this, this sounded very clear cut. but now all this other weird stuff is coming out, we just do not know! one thing. if she was leaning on the door and he opened it, the logical physical reaction of her would be to fall forward. either on him or on to the ground. that would either mean she had to get up from the ground or to push off him. to shoot, he either waited for her to get up and back up from him, or him from her.

would be interesting to hear from a neutral forensics expert to see how close the shot was.

ImaFungi


..... Given the slim odds that after being in a car accident this 19 year olds first thoughts were to rob a house (even though im sure you think that is the most probable scenario ....

There u go assuming again....As a matter of fact, no that isn't even a remote possibility, that she was robbing the house. I dont know why you think that I would think that. I don't know anything other than what has been reported in the news.

I'm sure the truth of this will come out.....you seem more interested in proving yourself right, me I am just curious why she died. Let the details come out, then we all can talk about it with a mu h clearer frame of reference than speculation.