man chases down home invader in car, shoots kills

[RACER X]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/local/story/905371.html

Legal experts say the decision of whether to charge a 76-year-old man who allegedly shot and killed a 15-year-old robbery suspect will hinge on many factors, primarily whether the man thought his life was in danger.

The issue is complicated by the fact that the shooting happened away from the house, after the robbers had left.

In 29 years as a criminal defense lawyer in Charlotte, George Laughrun said he's never seen a case with so many “twists and turns.”

The son of the alleged shooter said his father feared for his life. The mother of the dead teen said the man should have just called police.

Police still hadn't named the shooter as of Sunday night. But the son of C.L. McClure said his father chased down four teenagers who broke into his house Saturday afternoon and robbed him and his wife in the Newell community off East W.T. Harris Boulevard in northeast Charlotte.

Charlotte-Mecklenburg police say the robbery victim shot and killed one of the teens, 15-year-old Marcus Antonio Steven Fluker. The son, Larry, confirmed it was his father who fired the shots.

The robbery victim was tied up as the teens ransacked the house, police said. At least one of the robbers had a gun, police said. A police report said the teenagers took jewelry, a black wallet, cash, a .38 revolver and a gold Masonic ring.

The teenagers ran from the house on Grier Road, police said. The man freed himself, had his wife call 911, and drove after them, police said.

When he caught up with them on Ginger Lane, about two-tenths of a mile from the house, police say he shot and killed Fluker.

His mother, Felicia Fluker, said Sunday her son was not a bad kid........LOL

“Marcus is not that type of person,” she said. “He just got caught up that day with the wrong crowd.”

On Sunday a group of family and friends gathered to remember Marcus, a freshman at Independence High School.

“I hate what happened,” his mother said. The man “could've just called police.”

Charlotte criminal attorney Bob Trobich said District Attorney Peter Gilchrist has the discretion to file a wide range of charges – from no charges to homicide.

“The devil is in the details,” Trobich said.

For C.L. McClure, there's the issue that his home was invaded, and he and his wife were robbed.

“You've got the old adage, ‘A man's home is his castle,'” said Laughrun, a former prosecutor. “But you've got a cooling-off period in this case. Even if they were threatened, or felt threatened, you still can't walk down the street like in the Old West and take care of justice yourself.”

There are the ages of the dead teenager and the alleged assailant. The jury could be sympathetic to either.

“This man would probably be 78 before he went to trial. Is that someone 12 citizens of Mecklenburg County would want to send to prison?” Laughrun said.

Yet the robbery was over when the teenager was shot.

“A jury would have to decide, ‘Did he deserve to be shot for that?' And did someone have the right to be judge, jury and executioner?” Laughrun said.

There are also issues of whether the evidence will show the robbery victim shot in self-defense, and whether he reasonably feared he was going to be shot or harmed.

“From a prosecutor's standpoint, you got to ask, ‘If you were so afraid of this guy, why were you going after him?'” Laughrun said.

“It's going to be a tough call for a prosecutor to make.”

Tony Scheer, a Charlotte criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor, says the case will hinge on whether the man thought he was in imminent danger.

“Bottom line, if the evidence supports his belief that the young man was wheeling on him, he likely won't be charged,” said Scheer, who prosecuted homicide and violent crime cases for Gilchrist in the mid-1990s.

Larry McClure told the Observer on Saturday that his father told him he thought one of the robbers had a gun when he caught up with them, and he fired when the suspect turned towards him. Larry McClure could not be reached for comment Sunday.

The three other teens were arrested and charged with second-degree burglary, robbery with a dangerous weapon and conspiracy to commit robbery.

Police have identified them as Joseph Graves, 17, Matthew Everett Morgan, 17, and Tahjaue Wiley, 18. Morgan has been convicted of having a weapon on school property and is awaiting trial on an unrelated charge of armed robbery.

Fluker's mother said her son had not been arrested or jailed before. The Observer could not check criminal records for him because he was a minor.


http://media.charlotteobserver.com/smedia/2009/08/24/00/324-shootfolo.ART_GQLNOFJU.1+MarcusFluker.embedded.pro d_affiliate.138.jpg

[Dragonpaco]

i fucking hate mothers who go on tv and try and defend their dead piece of shit children. maybe she should be charged because if the bitch knew he was with the wrong crowd she should have intervened. kid got what was coming to him

[RACER X]

and what about the man chasing the thieves down and doing his business?

[Dragonpaco]

if a man is robbed, he has the right to track down his stuff and demand it back. if his demands are met with threats and he fears for his life he has the right to add some air conditioning to someone's skull. plain and simple

[RACER X]

no way! you must cower in your closet and let them do their business.......they have rights ya know!!!

[Dragonpaco]

most of their rights end when they bust in my house with a gun.

[tommymac]

and what about the man chasing the thieves down and doing his business?

I say good job one less career criminal on the streets, its either he was a good kid with a bad crowd or if hes in his 30's he just started turning his life around.

As per the law i would think the guy will get charged since it happened outside the home.

Tom

[z06boy]

Yeah this is a local story here.

I'd like to give the guy a medal BUT according to NC laws...he's probably going to not like what the future brings.


I wish he had gotten all of them.

[Gas Man]

i fucking hate mothers who go on tv and try and defend their dead piece of shit children. maybe she should be charged because if the bitch knew he was with the wrong crowd she should have intervened. kid got what was coming to him
Agreed!

[karl_1052]

I think the old dude will be picking up soap.
the only way he could get off is if he could convince a jury that they pointed their gun at him when he caught up to them.

[z06boy]

I think the old dude will be picking up soap.
the only way he could get off is if he could convince a jury that they pointed their gun at him when he caught up to them.

Now this I agree with BUT in NC you have the duty to retreat when not on your premises or the premises of the place of your employment so chasing them down the road may still not be in his favor.

Maybe it could be said he chased them to identify them or whatever...they pulled a gun...so he shot them ? :idk:

[Dragonpaco]

fortunatly our legal system doesnt require him to prove he had a gun pointed at him. it i s the prosecution's job to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not in fear for his life when he was confronting some ghetto scum who had broken into his house, tied him up, stole a firearm and fled with his possessions. the burden is on the prosecution. a good lawyer can get him off, a bad lawyer can get his trial postponed until he's offered a deal that suits him

[Tmall]

should have cut off his hands.

[EpyonXero]

Friggin Masons. . .

[Captain Morgan]

Have to remember that the 4 guys now had at least 2 guns, so the old man may very well have feared for his life after catching up to them. I don't blame him for trying to chase them down. If he'd just called the police like the kid's mom wanted, the only thing the police would have done is say, "sorry you got robbed, here's a case number." If the same kids robbed enough people the same way, the police might eventually get a lead on who's doing it, or the kids would eventually be shot in someone's home. At least they got caught this time.

[Papa_Complex]

With 4 guys and two guns he must not have been in very much fear for his life, to have chased them down.

[dReWpY]

fuck the little shit that got what he deserved, fuck them and hope they burn in hell next to micheal jackson as he fondels there balls like ebbs and nts that one night in indy...

[OneSickPsycho]

With 4 guys and two guns he must not have been in very much fear for his life, to have chased them down.

You can't say that he didn't fear for his life once he caught up with them... I know I've gotten myself into situations where I've reacted then realized I was in over my head... It really bothers me that people aren't allowed to defend/protect their personal property.

[pauldun170]

reminds me of the recent OJ Simpson case....a little bit

[OneSickPsycho]

reminds me of the recent OJ Simpson case....a little bit

A planned act is much different than a heat of the moment reaction.

[tommymac]

fuck the little shit that got what he deserved, fuck them and hope they burn in hell next to micheal jackson as he fondels there balls like ebbs and nts that one night in indy...

But michael jackson isnt dead :lol:

Tom

[Particle Man]

I always love the "But he's not a bad person" crap after the fact.

Um, yeah. Ok.

[tommymac]

I always love the "But he's not a bad person" crap after the fact.

Um, yeah. Ok.

its that or he was just starting to get his life together.

Tom

[z06boy]

I always love the "But he's not a bad person" crap after the fact.

Um, yeah. Ok.

its that or he was just starting to get his life together.

Tom

No kidding !!

[Papa_Complex]

You can't say that he didn't fear for his life once he caught up with them... I know I've gotten myself into situations where I've reacted then realized I was in over my head... It really bothers me that people aren't allowed to defend/protect their personal property.

Sure I can. He chased down 4 guys who had two firearms, knowing that there were 4 guys with 2 firearms. If he was truly scared, he wouldn't have done it. He was angry and acted on it.

[Kaneman]

Sure I can. He chased down 4 guys who had two firearms, knowing that there were 4 guys with 2 firearms. If he was truly scared, he wouldn't have done it. He was angry and acted on it.

So you're saying you can't be angry and scared for your life at the same time?

[Papa_Complex]

So you're saying you can't be angry and scared for your life at the same time?

I'm saying that if you're scared for your life then you don't go putting it in danger once you're out of it, and that if you do, then the act was one of anger not fear. Seems a fairly straight forward issue to me.

[Kaneman]

I'm saying that if you're scared for your life then you don't go putting it in danger once you're out of it, and that if you do, then the act was one of anger not fear. Seems a fairly straight forward issue to me.

Chasing them down was an act of anger. Shooting in self defense was an act of fear, as his life was being threatened by armed criminals.

Who's to say he didn't chase them down to politely ask for his possessions back when they began to once again act in a violent manner. At that point he used his firearm in self defense.

[fasternyou929]

:lol: I see what's happening here. P_C has a very direct viewpoint on what emotions were inolved, and everybody here would agree... if they weren't playing lawyer and trying to make the emotions work in his favor in a US Court.

When fearing your life you seek shelter and safety at all costs. Chasing the guys down after they left was pure anger.

Anger I agree 100% with and stand behind what he did, but that doesn't change the emotions involved.

[Papa_Complex]

Chasing them down was an act of anger. Shooting in self defense was an act of fear, as his life was being threatened by armed criminals.

Who's to say he didn't chase them down to politely ask for his possessions back when they began to once again act in a violent manner. At that point he used his firearm in self defense.

Chasing them down was an act of anger, that clearly shows which emotion was more important to him at the time. Having a cooling down period and then acting in a way that results in taking a life means that he's technically guilty. I'll have no sympathy for those who committed the crime; just a *little* for him.

[pauldun170]

Too be honest....if you are in hell (which by all available text is not a nice place)
having your balls fondled might not be the worst thing in the world.

sure beats having little man goat people with hot pitchforks poke at you in the nuts.


In the battle of Micheal_Jackson rubbing his vertiligo on your doodads vs little man goat people stabbing you with red hot pitchforks.....

ball fondling FTW

[Tmall]

I've had my balls fondled during a medical procedure. It was by an old lady, but it beat not having my balls fondled.. Jus' sayin'..

[EpyonXero]

So you're saying you can't be angry and scared for your life at the same time?

Isnt that how most gun owners feel? :lol

[Homeslice]

hopefully charged & found guilty

[MILK]

People are also threatening the guy top of everything else..

[101lifts2]

Add another statistic to the "blacks commit violent crimes catergory" LOL

While I don't agree that the guy should have chased him down and shot him, I do feel for the guy. They tied him and his wife up at gunpoint then ransacked his house.

You made the mistake of robbing someone at gunpoint. You have paid the ultimate price for it. I hope it was worth it.

[Captain Morgan]

:lol: I see what's happening here. P_C has a very direct viewpoint on what emotions were inolved, and everybody here would agree... if they weren't playing lawyer and trying to make the emotions work in his favor in a US Court.

When fearing your life you seek shelter and safety at all costs. Chasing the guys down after they left was pure anger.

Anger I agree 100% with and stand behind what he did, but that doesn't change the emotions involved.

How do we know he wasn't just trying to follow them to find out where they lived, hid out, etc.? Or maybe he was just trying to get a license number. Maybe they saw him, stopped and confronted him? At that point, he feared for his life and took appropriate action.

[101lifts2]

...he was with the wrong crowd ...

He was the wrong crowd.

[Dragonpaco]

He was the wrong crowd.

amd maybe this prevents other kids from falling in with the wrong crowd. his death should be celebrated to prevent other idiots from thinking they can be "hardcore"

[Kaneman]

hopefully charged & found guilty

Damn, you almost made me throw up in my mouth.

[Smittie61984]

no way! you must cower in your closet and let them do their business.......they have rights ya know!!!

The Ted Kennedy plan. Nice!!!

As far as I'm concerned if you have my shit you have part of my life and I want it back or compensated with yours. You steal my $100 tv with me making $10 an hour then you stole 10 hours of my life.

[fasternyou929]

How do we know he wasn't just trying to follow them to find out where they lived, hid out, etc.? Or maybe he was just trying to get a license number. Maybe they saw him, stopped and confronted him? At that point, he feared for his life and took appropriate action.I suppose that's possible but I think it's unlikely. If someone just bound my wife and I then ransacked our house, I wouldn't leave her home alone to get a plate number.

[Homeslice]

Redneck vigilante justice: the American way.

Or at least, the way that some Americans wish it was. Even though less than 1% of those who claim to want that style of justice would have the guts to actually practice it if given the opportunity.

[Tmall]

I guess its better to know you're a coward than to think you would do something?

[Homeslice]

I guess its better to know you're a coward than to think you would do something?

At least it's more honest. But then this is the internet.

[tommymac]

I guess its better to know you're a coward than to think you would do something?

I think thats a hard thing to determine. People will say anything, but untill youre put in a situation like that its hard to say.

Tom

[Kaneman]

Redneck vigilante justice: the American way.

Or at least, the way that some Americans wish it was. Even though less than 1% of those who claim to want that style of justice would have the guts to actually practice it if given the opportunity.

Why do you call them rednecks? Think this shows your biased way of thinking....you don't have to be a "redneck" to defend your property. Some people just don't want to bend over and get fucked in the ass...some people like getting fucked in the ass. I'm of the former group, which by the way does not make me a redneck, an internet hero, brave, cowardly or anything other than a dude that doesn't like to get fucked in the ass by dirty scumbags who don't deserve to breathe the same air as me.

What strikes me about your posts, Homeslice, is how you always come back to make the point that only a small percentage of us would actually do anything about it and that we're just thumping our chests on the internet. While I believe you're very wrong about that assumption what it really shows me is that YOU are too scared or whatever to do something so you think everyone else's heart must be in the same place.

But you're wrong. I carry a 1911 .45 in Condition 1 most places I go...not because it makes my dick bigger...but because there are bad people out there that deserve to get shot in the face if they dare try to take something I or my wife worked for. Its a mentality I was raised with...as is the case with most of the guys on this forum that you constantly oppose in these matters.

[Homeslice]

Why do you call them rednecks? Think this shows your biased way of thinking....you don't have to be a "redneck" to defend your property. .

You aren't a redneck for defending your home or your life with a gun.......But you're a redneck for getting into your car and chasing after them and shooting them, IMO.

But I love how some of you try to take anyone who objects to this behavior and lump them into the anti-gun crowd, or anti-self defense crowd.

What strikes me about your posts, Homeslice, is how you always come back to make the point that only a small percentage of us would actually do anything about it and that we're just thumping our chests on the internet. While I believe you're very wrong about that assumption what it really shows me is that YOU are too scared or whatever to do something so you think everyone else's heart must be in the same place.
.
Or perhaps it's not fear, but a different idea about what citizens should and should not be allowed to do. I don't think it's right to use deadly force against someone who no longer presents an equivalent force against you, and is simply running away with something they allegedly took from you. Think of the slippery slope that would open up.

I may be wrong but I doubt there are many police departments whose policies freely allow thier officers to shoot fleeing thieves unless they had used a weapon, had physically assaulted someone, or were physically threatening the officer.

[Kaneman]

If its just a difference in opinion then way make fun of those who think differently by calling them rednecks or chest thumpers?

I mean, I think your viewpoints related to self defense are ridiculous, but I give you credit because before I started reading your posts years ago I had no idea people actually thought like that. Seriously...it was eye opening.

Our biggest difference in this particular post is what we consider self defense. I consider what this guy did, chasing down the bad guys and doing some killing as self defense. To me defense is your response to a threat. These guys threatened him and his wife and he responded. It does not matter to me that he had to get untied and chase them down.

[tommymac]

If its just a difference in opinion then way make fun of those who think differently by calling them rednecks or chest thumpers?

I mean, I think your viewpoints related to self defense are ridiculous, but I give you credit because before I started reading your posts years ago I had no idea people actually thought like that. Seriously...it was eye opening.

Our biggest difference in this particular post is what we consider self defense. I consider what this guy did, chasing down the bad guys and doing some killing as self defense. To me defense is your response to a threat. These guys threatened him and his wife and he responded. It does not matter to me that he had to get untied and chase them down.


I would think at that point the threat no longer exsisted though. Theyre out of the house and hopefully long gone. Now I applaud what the guy did esp taking a few skells out of the gene pool, and would like to think if I owned a gun may do the same thing to at least try to retrieve my stuff.

Tom

[Homeslice]

If its just a difference in opinion then way make fun of those who think differently by calling them rednecks or chest thumpers?

I mean, I think your viewpoints related to self defense are ridiculous, but I give you credit because before I started reading your posts years ago I had no idea people actually thought like that. Seriously...it was eye opening.

Our biggest difference in this particular post is what we consider self defense. I consider what this guy did, chasing down the bad guys and doing some killing as self defense. To me defense is your response to a threat. These guys threatened him and his wife and he responded. It does not matter to me that he had to get untied and chase them down.

To me, true self defense = your life or limb is in danger, so you defend yourself. So the only way this case could be called "self defense" is if you wanted to make sure someone doesn't threaten your life in the future, assuming they ever will. And that's a pretty big gray area. I could see how it might be legitimate for someone to think "That burglar had a weapon and I don't want him to have the opportunity to come back again, or threaten someone else." But the law has to create boundaries in order to avoid a slippery slope. That's why this guy will probably face charges.

[Kaneman]

I would think at that point the threat no longer exsisted though. Theyre out of the house and hopefully long gone. Now I applaud what the guy did esp taking a few skells out of the gene pool, and would like to think if I owned a gun may do the same thing to at least try to retrieve my stuff.

Tom

Yea I understand what you're saying, but from my POV my property is now in danger and in order to defend it I have to chase it down and kill 4 guys. Defense to me means response. It means I didn't start the fight but I had to finish it. Luckily for me, my state law agrees:

"A person is justified in using deadly force against another to pervent the other who is fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, or theft during the nighttime, from escaping with the property and he reasonable believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other means; or, the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the property would expose him or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. (Nighttime is defined as the period 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise.)"

Unfortunately for this guy his state probably doesn't see it that way and he is going to go to prison. Damn shame, but I sure wish more people would react the same way he did.

Let me add here, I own some nice Samurai swords and I would've cut those dudes hands off so I say they got off lucky. Chuck Norris BITCHES!

[Digifox]

Dumb shit.


Threw his life away...I dont care if he was 2 miles away when he caught him, the dumbass should have never broken into & tired them old people up.

I say Great job to the old guy.

[101lifts2]

Redneck vigilante justice: the American way.

Or at least, the way that some Americans wish it was. Even though less than 1% of those who claim to want that style of justice would have the guts to actually practice it if given the opportunity.

This isn't a guy that stole a case of beer and ran off. He forced his way with 3 others into the house using a gun, tied the couple up while he ransacked their home.

He is no fucking angel and I hope the old guy does not get charged.

[101lifts2]

..... I don't think it's right to use deadly force against someone who no longer presents an equivalent force against you, and is simply running away with something they allegedly took from you......

These pieces of shit POINTED A GUN AND THEN TIED THE COUPLE UP ALL WHILE ROBBING THEIR HOUSE. They didn't simply grab an item and run. BIG FUCKING DIFFERENCE IMO.

Let God sort him out now...

[fasternyou929]

...and is simply running away with something they allegedly took from you.Sign #1 you're talking too much like a news reporter. :lmao:

I can see it now: 'Slice, just held captive by armed robbers as they rummaged through all his belongings, runs down the street screaming at the alleged thieves: "you allegedly stole my freshly ironed designer jeans!"

[Homeslice]

:lol:

I say allegedly because if this was legal everywhere, people would just shoot someone and claim they were trying to steal their shit :lol:

And I don't own any designer jeans.......at the moment :lmao: But I HAVE been hankering for a dark, dressy crosshatch-pattern straight-leg or slim cut, but without all the fake grass stains or fake rips that 90% of jeans have nowadays :lol:

[EpyonXero]

To me, true self defense = your life or limb is in danger, so you defend yourself. So the only way this case could be called "self defense" is if you wanted to make sure someone doesn't threaten your life in the future, assuming they ever will. And that's a pretty big gray area. I could see how it might be legitimate for someone to think "That burglar had a weapon and I don't want him to have the opportunity to come back again, or threaten someone else." But the law has to create boundaries in order to avoid a slippery slope. That's why this guy will probably face charges.

I agree. I dont blame the old man for what he did, if someone tied me or my wife up and rob my house I might want to do the same thing he did. I just have a problem with people trying to call what he did self defense when if reality it was simply vengeance. Its only defense if you feel your life is in immediate danger and using your weapon is the only way out. The man was pissed and want to get back at the thieves so he chased them down and killed one.

The thieves deserved what happened to them but in a civilized society we cant have people running around exacting their own punishments.

[Tmall]

Why not? A man with a badge is suddenly infallible? That's been proven wrong time and time again.

[Kaneman]

I agree. I dont blame the old man for what he did, if someone tied me or my wife up and rob my house I might want to do the same thing he did. I just have a problem with people trying to call what he did self defense when if reality it was simply vengeance. Its only defense if you feel your life is in immediate danger and using your weapon is the only way out. The man was pissed and want to get back at the thieves so he chased them down and killed one.

The thieves deserved what happened to them but in a civilized society we cant have people running around exacting their own punishments.

But what you're also saying is that in a society we can't have people asking for the peaceful return of their possessions, and that is extremely unfortunate.

[Apoc]

I hope the cocksucker bled slowly and suffered. They should pin a fucking medal on his chest and parade him through the streets for ending the piece of shits life.

Fuck with me and point a gun at me, thats one thing. Fuck with my mother/father/sister/wife/gf or any combinateion of those, and I will kill you where you stand, wether you left my house or not. Point a gun at my mother, and I will hunt you to the ends of the fucking earth. Harm my sister, and you'll wish you had someone merciful like Hitler in charge of the torture.

Fuck that. Threaten my families life with weapons, and if I live I will fucking savagely and brutally murder you. They pointed guns at his wife, and he did what any man should be allowed to do in such a situation.

[EpyonXero]

Why not? A man with a badge is suddenly infallible? That's been proven wrong time and time again.

Im not a big fan of cops at all. But I trust a third party to make better decisions than an angry victim with a gun. What if the guy had chased after the wrong car and started shooting at some guys who "fit the description" but had nothing to do with the robbery? This is why we have due process, to try and make sure we get it right.

[Kaneman]

Im not a big fan of cops at all. But I trust a third party to make better decisions than an angry victim with a gun. What if the guy had chased after the wrong car and started shooting at some guys who "fit the description" but had nothing to do with the robbery? This is why we have due process, to try and make sure we get it right.

Why not take it on a case by case basis instead of creating blanket laws that will put victims like this guy in prison?

Someone robs you at gunpoint and you chase them down, ask for your possessions back, and have to use deadly force to defend yourself...mayor gives you the key to the city.

Someone robs you at gunpoint and you chase down and murder the wrong people...you go to prison.

Simple.