Saturday, November 16, 2013

Detroit man who shot young woman seeking help in the face will be charged with murder.

Courtesy of Think Progress:  

A Detroit-area homeowner who shot in the face a 19-year-old girl at his door will be charged with murder, Wayne County prosecutors announced Thursday. The charges include murder in the second degree, which carries a term of up to life in prison; a manslaughter charge with a maximum term of 15 years in prison; and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony or attempted commission, which carries a term of two years in prison. 

In the two weeks since Renisha McBride was shot dead outside the Dearborn Heights home, protests have escalated around the country to charge the homeowner, suggesting comparisons to the killing of Trayvon Martin. The shooter was white and McBride is African American. While the homeowner, now identified as Theodore P. Wafer, age 54, initially told police he discharged the gun by accident, his lawyer since told the press the shooting was “justified” and “reasonable,” invoking language from Michigan’s “Shoot First” laws that allow immunity for some self-defense shootings. 

At a press conference Friday, Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy said her office determined that Wafer “did not act in lawful self-defense.” It is now clear that Michigan’s Stand Your Ground-like laws did not stop prosecutors from charging Wafer. Wafer may, however, still seek immunity from charges at trial.

You know the thing that kind of bothers me about this story is that it was NOT simply assumed that a man who shot an unarmed person standing outside of his house would be charged with murder. 

We now live in a world where the onus seems to be to convince the police that the victim did NOT deserve to die before they will level charges. A world where killing a young man armed with an iced tea and a bag of Skittles. is not enough to send you to jail.

That is a world that we need to change.


  1. One important fact that was left out of this article:

    Ms. McBride had a .218 Blood Alcohol Level (more than 2x the legal limit to drive) at the time of death and had possibly been smoking marijuana. She was seeking help because she had crashed her car while driving in that state of intoxication.

    We also don't know what the nature of the interaction between her and the shooter was yet.

    These 2 points are important facts in this case, and may indicate that the shooter was indeed acting in self-defense (though his change of story from "accidental" to "justified" is suspicious).

    If he's guilty by all means try, convict and sentence him, but let's not rush to judgement just because of the color of the skin of the victim and shooter.

    1. Anonymous1:22 PM

      Oh BULLSHIT. She was unarmed, probably frightened and clearly a WOMAN. Rush to judgement, MY ASS, you idiot, seems that it was the SHOOTER who rushed to judgement and the girl is dead. She gets no vote, or no voice. You have just illustrated Gryphen's point perfectly and you really need to rethink what you just wrote.

    2. Anonymous1:37 PM

      well said.

    3. Anonymous2:46 PM

      He was standing behind a locked and closed screen door which he shot through. Forget skin color for a minute and answer this why did he not just close front door and call the cops.

    4. Anonymous2:48 PM

      How did he know she was unarmed?
      I agree that most women are less of a threat that most men, but there are a whole lot of woman who are scarier, and meaner, than a whole lot of me.

    5. angela3:04 PM

      Oh for Fucks Sake Anon 2:48!
      He was in his house. All he had to do was stay behind the damned locked door. And she didn't have a gun. The idiot murderer in the house did. So what is it about the girl in the picture that makes her look scary?

    6. I see. So it's OK to shoot drunk people. People who are high deserve to be killed.

      Did I interpret that correctly?

      These two events have NOTHING to do with this. He was behind a locked door. He was in no danger.

    7. Dinty3:48 PM

      Clearly we do not have all of the facts of the case, yet many of you have already decided who is in the right, and who is in the wrong. If that works for you, great, I don't care what you think of me.

      I'll wait for the facts before I judge (for the record, I think George Zimerman should have been found guilty, but I waited in the case as well).

    8. Did you see the killer's photo? He's a well-built white man, looks like he works out. He was not afraid of that girl rattling his locked screen door. He killed her dead for no good reason.

    9. Anonymous7:36 PM

      He wasn't behind a wooden (or steel) locked door. Where did you get that? He was behind a screen door! If this were my house, for me to shoot out the screen door, I'd pretty much be somewhere between a few feet and point blank with the screen door. If she's drunk, and trying to get in, and acting crazy, and not seeming to hear his orders to leave (I don't know that that happened, but I don't know it didn't happen either), it might be reasonable to shoot.
      It was a screen door. When she saw a man with a shotgun that he looked ready to use, why didn't she at least back up? if not run.
      I don't know what happened, but it certainly doesn't seem like a slam dunk.

    10. Anonymous7:42 PM

      I jsut wrote the above about the screen door. But then, why didn't he close the door? and why is the screen door open in the middle of the night.
      I'm still with 12:46 - we don't know everything yet.

    11. Again, I'm undecided here. As for "premeditated" so he planned to have her wreck in front of his house and come to his door? No, he didn't, and you're talking out of your ass and you know it.

      I'm not going to advocate for the shooter (or the victim) because I don't know enough about what happened that night to do so, but hey, people have drawn parallels to the Zimmerman case so I guess some of you know enough from that to try, convict and sentence the guy (in once case a person calling for execution).

      Heaven forbid we use some critical thinking when a sensationalist case comes up.

    12. WRT to mlaiuppa's assertion: Of course it is not OK to shoot someone who is drunk just because they are drunk. Even if they were driving around with a BAC that was 2-3 times over the legal limit (almost as dangerous as answering the door with a shotgun with your finger on the trigger). But you don't really know what happened on that porch do you?

      I know I don't. If he killed her in cold blood I say let him feel the full weight of his crime, but if he was defending himself or his household, that needs to be taken in consideration.

    13. Bullshit! If it were a drunk blonde/blue teen he would thank his lucky stars. Miss McBride was murdered by a white coldblooded racist, unstabled luntic who waited before calling for help.

      Just as the Black kids before her.

    14. STFU you sound more stupid than the insufferable clown. The whole.time you are defending the killer.

      Go back to being anonymous.

    15. Anonymous8:22 AM

      game of life- you are the racist moron and you dont even realize it you dipshit.

    16. STFU bustol and go wash yourself. Don't believe grandpa chucky when he claims "airing out" is enough.

      The lower 48 and Hawaii can smell your dysfunctional klan 50 miles away.

    17. Anonymous7:01 PM

      You truly are a simpleton Game of Life.
      And your posting furor is quaintly similar to the simple one track minded angry C4P crowd, maybe your uncle is VG Gent or SlouisX.

  2. That scum should be shot dead and his family sent the bill for the ammo. For the record I'm a Lifetime member of the NRA and have carried a concealed firearm for over 30 years.

  3. Even if she was drunk and threatened the homeowner's life (not at all likely), he was inside his house and could have exited out the back without ever going near the girl.

    Just because she startled him, made him fearful or even threatened him, it's not a reasonable excuse to murder her. He could escape. He could shoot warning shots. He could shoot at feet or legs. But he shot her dead in the face.

    He definitely intended to kill her and there is no excuse. Enough with these trigger-happy gun nuts claiming self-defense.

  4. Anonymous4:01 PM

    And that's why i plan to never visit your third world country, heck even Iraq seems safer by comparison.

  5. Anita Winecooler6:58 PM

    When DID this "prove you're a justified victim to the police" bullshit come from? This girl's only "crime" was trying to get help after an accident (I don't care what HER blood alcohol level, marijuana, cocaine, lsd, prozac , race, creed or political party) The man had three choices. Call the cops, render assistance, or ignore it. He's safe in his home and she's outside and needs help.

    Of course, since the gun happened to be there, he felt "threatened" and just HAD to pick it up, load it, aim and shoot to kill someone unarmed.

    This guy's the scum of the earth and deserves to be judged by a jury of his peers and put away.


Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.