[304065]

So let me get this straight. A couple guys attempt to steal Yoon Ho Song's POS honda, they fail, he goes outside and shoots one of them to death.

Let's say his Honda is worth $22,000 just for fun.

If Yoon Ho Song (defendant) were wearing a $22,000 Rolex President and somebody grabbed at it, would he be justified in taking the person's life for attempted robbery? This may even be a better fact pattern because the would-be robber actually touched defendant during the attempt, which could have placed defendant in apprehension of death or grevious bodily injury. Certainly a lot more than trying to steal his car without touching him.

What if someone sent him an email from Nigeria attempting to swindle him out of $22,000? Would he be justified in killing the person if he could identify him to his satisfaction? Or does the fact that the robbery is remote in location and remote in time change your answer? What would your answer be if it were $220,000?

There are two points here. One is that California Penal Law 187 says it's murder, so there's nothing to argue there.

The second point is whether inflicting death or grevious bodily injury is justified in defense of property. The consensus here seems to be that it would be.

To be continued. . .