Was it murder?
 

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A 26-year-old Los Angeles man who prosecutors say shot at two thieves stealing his car, killing one of them, was charged on Wednesday with murder.

Yoon Ho Song could face 50 years to life in prison if he is convicted of the first degree murder of Mario Sandoval Martinez and a special allegation of using a handgun, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office said.

Prosecutors say Song came out of his house to find two car thieves pushing his customized Honda out of his driveway in the predawn hours on Monday and opened fire, hitting Martinez, 25, in the back. The second suspect got away.

"The fact that your car is being stolen isn't a legal justification for killing somebody," Deputy District Attorney Frank Somes said. "Generally, you're not allowed to kill people unless they are committing a violent felony or you are acting in self defense."

Somes said police initially focused on Song as a crime victim but "essentially began questioning whether he was the victim or a suspect when they learned the person stealing the car had been shot in the back."

An attorney for Song, who was expected to make his first court appearance in the case as early as Wednesday, could not be reached for comment.




Hopefully a jury will let him go. I have no sympathy for any thieves.

Even in the ol wild west it was frowned on to shoot a man in the back, a couple of warning shots over his head would have been just as effective and he'd be driving his honda to the bar instead of to the courthouse.....

"It was dark, your honor, and one of the figures made an abrupt move like he was drawing a weapon."

Or,

"I had just run outside, your honor, and it was bright, and I couldn't see very well (I have a vitamin A deficiency), but one of the figures made an abrupt move like he was drawing a weapon."

I think that seems to cover it.

It will be tough to get acquitted of shooting an unarmed thief in the back unless he's a cop.
Edit: The shooter that is.

I would have let him take the Honda and just call the police - I mean its a Honda - if it was a Porsche then we got a problem - I wish them the best of luck shifting a 915 tranny without stalling the first time.

Another f**king coward with a gun.

He should have dragged the guy into the house and put a knife in his hand.

Nah. Just a man who loves his Honda.

It is murder, obviously.

You may disagree, but those are how the current statutes in California have defined it. There has never been a defense of property clause in California self-defense law as far as I know. The only self-defense arguments that can be used only apply when you are stopping someone from using deadly force against you or someone else.

Shooting someone in the back is definitely going to screw you, big time.

JCM

"In a sluggish economy, never, ever, fu'k with another mans livelyhood."

-- Guido, the killer pimp (Joe Pontoliano --Risky Business )

Warning shots will get you tagged, too.
The best course of action would be just to show them the weapon. I'm pretty sure that would have ended the situation.

JCM

That was my first thought.

Well it might have been murder, but there is one less scumbag out there.

"I was in fear of my life"

That's the golden phrase right there.

JCM

scumbags often have families and kids too...and the presumption in America is innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. A .38 is not a court of law.

And warning shots are a no-no. If my kid is playing on the playground and gets hit by a stray "warning shot" that someone fired over his stupid car (of ANY made) getting stolen...that is pathetic.

Stealing scumbags have a right to live. Not in my driveway.

Ok,ok,ok I'm no lawyer and don't care for guns much, the "warning shots" thing was just an alternative to popping the scumbag in the back, perhaps just firing a few rounds into the ground in front of his own feet in his own yard would of sufficed. It is unlikely that the thieves would have returned to press charges.. knock, knock, oh, it you two guys, come on in..have a seat i'll beeeee riiight baack......

I believe the gun owner mantra is "a gun should never be pulled unless you intend to kill"...or something to that effect. Warning shots, especially in a neighborhood, would be a huge mistake (read nostatic's post).

To me this is yet another argument against owning a gun. I highly doubt the dumbass car owner would have chased the guy down and beat him with a stick or knifed him. And for what? Throw that JA in jail!!

I'm not thinking many responsible gun owners would resort to shooting someone in the street over a car.


(Well maybe in Stillfart, Kentucy.)

Definitely murder. It's silly to shoot someone over your Honda let alone any worldly possession. If someone carjacked me in my 911, I'd be like here's the key and the ignition is on the left. Things can be replaced, a life (even that of a lowly criminal) can't be.

Can you imagine the last thoughts that ran through the mind of that stupid car thief. Oh my God, I just got shot and all I was doing was stealing this crappy car... Sad, just sad.

He should have just called the cops and brought out his Louisville slugger.