Is anyone here familiar with the LaRue Bratcher case?

[Scarlett]

 

I am going to post the most recent article about the case that I quickly googled.  My cousin is a close friend of him.  Otherwise I would have never heard of the case even though I live only 2 hours from OKC where this is all taking place.

https://www.yahoo.com/now/stand-ground-self-defense-claim-180600498.html

[livetoread]

This is one of those situations where I have to wonder what would be happening if the races were reversed. Can't say I'd know for sure, but I certainly have my suspicions. 

[Scarlett]

49 minutes ago, livetoread said:

This is one of those situations where I have to wonder what would be happening if the races were reversed. Can't say I'd know for sure, but I certainly have my suspicions. 

I know.  I wonder too.  

I don't know how the stand your ground defense will play out since he had let his grow license lapse.  

[Murphy101]

So wait - a lapsed license means you do not own the property at all anymore?  I thought stand your ground was literally the ground you own.  If I get behind on my property tax would that mean I couldn’t claim stand your ground if someone broke into my house?!  And a note of dadgum that’s stupid to let his license lapse and end up having millions of dollars of pot product confiscated. All that concern over some guy stealing some of it and he ends up losing it all bc he didn’t cover the licensing?!  But did that license mean he didn’t have a legit lease or ownership of the actual facility to claim as his “ground”?

[Corraleno]

3 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

So wait - a lapsed license means you do not own the property at all anymore?  I thought stand your ground was literally the ground you own.  If I get behind on my property tax would that mean I couldn’t claim stand your ground if someone broke into my house?!  And a note of dadgum that’s stupid to let his license lapse and end up having millions of dollars of pot product confiscated. All that concern over some guy stealing some of it and he ends up losing it all bc he didn’t cover the licensing?!  But did that license mean he didn’t have a legit lease or ownership of the actual facility to claim as his “ground”?

The legal issue isn't that he doesn't own the property, it's that the lapsed license means he was technically "engaged in illegal activity," and under those circumstances "stand your ground" does not apply. If he hadn't let the licenses lapse, he'd be able to claim it, but the lapsed license means he's lost all his product and is now charged with first-degree murder, which seems ridiculous over not paying a licensing fee. If a white business owner who'd let his business license lapse shot a black intruder, they'd likely be calling it a clerical oversight, not confiscating his business and charging him with murder.

[Murphy101]

21 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

The legal issue isn't that he doesn't own the property, it's that the lapsed license means he was technically "engaged in illegal activity," and under those circumstances "stand your ground" does not apply. If he hadn't let the licenses lapse, he'd be able to claim it, but the lapsed license means he's lost all his product and is now charged with first-degree murder, which seems ridiculous over not paying a licensing fee. If a white business owner who'd let his business license lapse shot a black intruder, they'd likely be calling it a clerical oversight, not confiscating his business and charging him with murder.

Okay so basically the license is the only thing that changes if from stand your (legally legit) ground vs a street drug skirmish.  That makes sense actually.  Is that the same legal standing and prosecution history if instead of pot this had been a bar owner, brewer, or a compound pharmacist? Seems we need the answer to that question before we can rush to conclude a race factor. And it should be getting asked somewhere. 

[Janeway]

The guy was selling drugs and shot through a door and killed someone who was not even inside yet. He should be found guilty. He didn’t even call the police to stop the guy even though the guy was not even inside yet.

[Scarlett]

5 hours ago, Janeway said:

The guy was selling drugs and shot through a door and killed someone who was not even inside yet. He should be found guilty. He didn’t even call the police to stop the guy even though the guy was not even inside yet.

Although I agree that he should have waited to see if the guy could get in.....I think stand your ground law says he was not required to wait.  But he can't use the the Stand Your Ground defense because his license was lapse.

[Scarlett]

5 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

Okay so basically the license is the only thing that changes if from stand your (legally legit) ground vs a street drug skirmish.  That makes sense actually.  Is that the same legal standing and prosecution history if instead of pot this had been a bar owner, brewer, or a compound pharmacist? Seems we need the answer to that question before we can rush to conclude a race factor. And it should be getting asked somewhere. 

Right.  So if a bar owner shot a would be robber at the bar and it was found his liquor license had expired....would he lose the Stand Your Ground Defense?   I don't know the answer.

Of course I am looking through my cousin's IG and all I am seeing is the praises of a close friend.  So I imagine that view is biased.

[livetoread]

Seems to me this is a judgement call by the prosecutor. They can decide whether to pursue charges or not, and if so, which ones. It's a complicated situation and the prosecutor could make arguments either way. Still, I'm thinking that if the races were reversed, the prosecutor would not be pursuing these charges. Which narrative is more likely to be believed by the community that elects the prosecutor? "Black man involved in illegal drug operation shoots white man who might have just been trying the door" or "business man protects his property from would be thief." Reverse the races and then I wonder which narrative is more believable.

 

Edited January 13, 2022 by livetoread

[TravelingChris]

5 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Although I agree that he should have waited to see if the guy could get in.....I think stand your ground law says he was not required to wait.  But he can't use the the Stand Your Ground defense because his license was lapse.

We had this argument in our zoom Sunday School.  I said I am not waiting for anyone to actually bust down my door or bust my window.  I am a disabled woman--I have a complete right to protect myself- and if I waited till they got actually in- I would maybe be dead.  

I think the whole license expired part is not relevant at all.  That is how I would see it as a juror.  Now, this guy wasn't disabled nor a small woman, etc.  But I would have to read the law to know how I would vote on it--- except for the part about license renewal because that seems totally stupid and even if the law said that- I would be for the jury nullifaction of that part of the law.

And yes, I had heard about it and read about it some time ago but didn't remember names.  I didn't even remember Gabby Petito's name right away.

[Murphy101]

Here is another link that might be slightly more helpful. I’m suspicious of the lack of making the records accessible already.  Makes me wonder what we don’t know and why the prosecutor feels we shouldn’t know it. 
 

https://overmanlegal.com/bratcher-case/

[TravelingChris]

2 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

Here is another link that might be slightly more helpful. I’m suspicious of the lack of making the records accessible already.  Makes me wonder what we don’t know and why the prosecutor feels we shouldn’t know it. 
 

https://overmanlegal.com/bratcher-case/

I don't like secrecy in court cases.

[Scarlett]

10 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

Here is another link that might be slightly more helpful. I’m suspicious of the lack of making the records accessible already.  Makes me wonder what we don’t know and why the prosecutor feels we shouldn’t know it. 
 

https://overmanlegal.com/bratcher-case/

Thank you.  That is a better overview of it than that Yahoo article.  Yahoo is never my first source of info but it was the most recent I could find.

I am definitely interested in how this will play out.

[Janeway]

On 1/13/2022 at 4:30 PM, Scarlett said:

Although I agree that he should have waited to see if the guy could get in.....I think stand your ground law says he was not required to wait.  But he can't use the the Stand Your Ground defense because his license was lapse.

There was a case in Texas a few years ago where a man came in to his teen daughter's room and saw a boy in bed with her and the father shot and killed the boy. Turned out, the boy was a boyfriend who had been invited in, and he was completely unarmed-nothing at all happened that would have made him a threat, other than the assumption by the father that the boy had raped his daughter. So it was not about self defense but rather was about revenge against someone who he thought was a rapist. He got off too. The law should change to include that the killing must be done in self defense. Otherwise, some people might invite their inlaws over or exboy/girlfriends..etc.

[TravelingChris]

2 minutes ago, Janeway said:

The law should change to include that the killing must be done in self defense. Otherwise, some people might invite their inlaws over or exboy/girlfriends..etc.

I would be okay if it allowed for self defense and defense of property if person into the house or breaking into the house or store.  Most states allow store owners to shoot robbers anc I think home owners should hsve that same right.

But yeah, no shootings if guests, etc.

We just had a idiotic nextdoor neighbor posting.  This woman claimed to be z trafficking survivor and posted photo of a similar looking van to one on her street that was stopping or driving slowly by houses.  She also said she had a young daughter and her husband armed himself in his house while this van was driving  by.  This is the type of  moronic behavior that can end up w a total innocent being shot or being labeled as z criminal.  In Dec, my dh and I were doing this behavior of stopping and driving slowly-  we were looking for house numbers to find the right house where a friend had moved to and it was our first time there.  The person may have been doing that. There are a lot of innocent reasons for that type of behavior and highly unlikely  to be sex traffickers.