Vigilantes ?

[JD Mandrell]

In Oregon, the general standard (and each case is unique) is that to establish a self-defense you have to show three things: means, opportunity, and intent. First, you need to show that at the time and in the circumstances you reasonably believed that the person against whom you used deadly force had a means to cause you a great bodily injury immediately at that time. This could be a weapon or it could simply mean that your attacker is obviously physically strong enough to cause you that great bodily injury by manual means. Next, you need to show that at the time and in the circumstances you reasonably believed that the person against whom you used deadly force had an opportunity to cause you a great bodily injury immediately at that time. Physical proximity is usually part of this. Finally, you need to show that at the time and in the circumstances you reasonably believed that the person against whom you used deadly force intended to cause you a great bodily injury immediately at that time.

Notice, first, that it is all about you.

Second, notice that it is is all about right now.

When a mob chases down a criminal who some time ago committed a crime aggainst someone else, you can't establish any one of the three criteria... and you really need to establish all three.

That's exactly what I said earlier.

In the original case that started this thread, (referenced by mete), the attacker had pursued his victim from attack site A to attack site B and continued his attack on her when he was stabbed. (justified)

In the second example (referenced by Esav), the attacker had ceased his attack and fled, but was pursued by a mob and killed after his attack was over. (unjustifed) Although I would love to know if anyone ever got convicted.

 

[Mike Hull]

vigilantes or good samaritans?

IMHO Vigilantes are always good samaritans and we need more of them.:thumbup:

+1. This isn't about the screwed up laws, or the even worse courts system, it was a question of, if we thought they were good Samaritans or vigilantes. The two can't often be told apart when they come to someone's aid.

I couldn't care less what the "law" says about anything. If people want to assault and rob, they deserve to die. Prison does no good, just remove their oxygen permit permanently.

We're fast getting like England where you can't use anymore force than was used against you. This isn't some kind of game, a man can easily crush a womans face beating on her, requiring years of surgery just to get her back to normal, physically, if she had the money.
I think they should have killed him so he couldn't ever do it again.:barf:

 

[JD Mandrell]

If people want to assault and rob, they deserve to die. Prison does no good, just remove their oxygen permit permanently.

That's about the best way I have ever heard that said!

 

[mete]

My take on this is first that the media loves the word 'vigilante'. These men were justified since they prevented further attack. Sadly they had to run off to prevent unjustifiable prosecution [and persecution] !!