Spokane7
67°
October 17, 2011 in News, City
Suspected marijuana thief shot to death in Grant County
A medical marijuana patient who shot a suspected burglar near Moses Lake Sunday night has been arrested for unlawfully possessing a firearm.
Two suspected accomplices are at large after the shooting at 44-year-old Timothy P. Mandelas’ home at 4301 Ottmar Road NE #5 about 9 p.m. that led to the death of an alleged burglar. The man’s name is not being released pending notification of relatives.
Police are working to get descriptions of the two suspected accomplices, according to a news release.
Police are still investigating the shooting, which they believe occurred when the men tried to steal marijuana from Mandelas, a convicted felon with a medical marijuana card.
Mandelas’ criminal history includes previous arrests for forgery and possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and a 2010 arrest for fourth-degree assault/domestic violence, according to the Grant County Sheriff’s Office.
Recent stories in News
Gay marriage foes: ballot measure has enough signatures May 30, 2012 8- 1992 murder trial begins against sex offender May 30, 2012 1
- Supermajority for taxes unconstitutional, judge rules May 30, 2012 18
- Man dies following early Saturday car crash May 30, 2012 15
- Sex trafficking suspects released as probe continues May 29, 2012 7
mrd on October 17 at 6:21 p.m.
Keep giving out those medical mj cards and you will continue to see these types of criminal situations. I’m sure glad Idaho is too smart to fall for legalized mj so far.
Ed Byrnes on October 17 at 6:53 p.m.
Regardless of what the property is one does not have the right to use deadly force in defense of property.
Ed
Bee509 on October 17 at 6:53 p.m.
More of a reason for outright legalization, burglary is burglary don’t blame MMJ. Much more often you see violence involved with pharmaceuticals than you do with MMJ. The recent stories involving MMJ pale in comparison to the number and severity of local robberies involving Oxycontin.
neanders on October 17 at 7:20 p.m.
Ed, I normally find you to be the voice of reason on this often unreasonable blog, but in this case I think your reasoning is flawed. While I would agree that defense of property does not justify deadly force, I would submit that if someone breaks into my home (making an assumption here), I am not going to attempt to determine if the intent is to steal my laptop or harm me/my family, so he/she would not be walking out. He/she would be riding out on a gurney, and whether the sheet is up or down would depend on just how big/threatening the perp is. Just my $.02…
Neil
Ed Byrnes on October 17 at 7:32 p.m.
Neil, I would indeed be ready to shoot and would do so without hesitation at a hint of force toward me or anyone else in my home from a burglar, though if they only took my property and left the law would find me in the wrong for shooting. Since I would be a better father here in the community than in prison I would do my best to stay aligned with the legal standards on this issue.
Thank you for your kind thoughts about my postings and also my thanks for your reasoned response to me.
Ed
johnclarke on October 17 at 7:43 p.m.
Ed Byrnes on October 17 at 6:53 p.m.
Regardless of what the property is one does not have the right to use deadly force in defense of property.
Washington is a “Castle Doctrine” state.
From wikipedia;
that designates one’s place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one’s car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his “castle”), and any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.
misjustice on October 17 at 7:53 p.m.
Mandelas was a felon in possession of a gun, a big no-no…
Ed Byrnes on October 17 at 8:09 p.m.
John,
“…from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack.” This implies that some form of threat, beyond the presence of a burglar, would need to be present.
If you have recent State of Washington case law to cite on this matter I will publicly stand corrected.
Ed
neanders on October 17 at 8:41 p.m.
Actually, in reading RCW 9A.16.050 Homicide — By other person — When justifiable: it seems pretty clear that slaying a person committing a felony by illegally entering my home with the apparent intent to commit even more felonies is perfectly justifiable in the eyes of the law. And I quote:
Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:
(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or
(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.
So I would contend that Ed’s premise that the law would find him in the wrong for shooting someone illegally in his home is a point that any decent defense attorney would be able to counter.
Neil
Ed Byrnes on October 17 at 11:00 p.m.
Neil,
I now publicly stand corrected. Thank you for bringing informative evidence to bear in this forum.
Ed Byrnes