Kimber Talk Forums banner

Massad for the defense

4K views 23 replies 8 participants last post by  Chuck43 
#1 ·
Newspaper Publication News Sleeve Font


Massad Ayoob testifies for the defense of 66 year old home owner from Helena, MT who shot and killed intruder/ burglar in his home. James Stiffler is charged with deliberate homicide for defending himself and his castle 2 years ago. The jury will be sending a message by their verdict probably at the end of the week. Hoping it's a warning to the rest of the scumbag lowlife crooks out there. And if Mr Stiffler is found innocent I hope he sues the crap out of the DA for malicious prosecution. Just sayin - carry on.
 
See less See more
1
#3 ·
7 women, 5 man jury. But ya just never know what a jury will decide.
The same judge and prosecutor that put away my friends wife who shot and killed him and his new girl friend 2 years after they separated and 1 week after he filed for divorce. They got that one right and she received 2 consecutive life sentences. You can Google Michelle Gable Helena Mt for more info. I don't know James Stiffler but he lives about a mile from me.
 
#16 ·
When a bad guy comes on your property, it's already trespassing, breaking the law. Whats he doing there? Then he breaks into your home. A severe violation of our safety and peace of mind for anyone in the home. I respectfully disagree with Cucamonga. He now has how much more anguish day after day until this is settled. it's tragic. That anxiety Stiffler has been made to endure is an embarrassment to our system and sends a dangerous message to thugs. IMO
 
#17 ·
I was paraphrasing the news article; he was high-fiving his attorney and was pretty happy he wasn't found guilty. And the consensus is that the prosecutor probably won't try the case again and will dismiss the charges. I think they would find it pretty difficult to find 12 jurors to come together for unanimous guilty verdict here in Montana. I'm pretty sure his anxiety is quite diminished compared to what it has been for the past two weeks. After all, the prosecutor made his best case, brought in all his expert witnesses and he couldn't convince a jury of Jim's appears that he was guilty of murder. This whole situation has been pretty difficult for Jim I'm sure, but this is the best news he's had in the past six months.
 
#20 ·
I was just thinking about finding an unknown intruder in your home and how that would set off an involuntary primal instinct to dispatch that intruder from harming your people or stealing your stuff. That instinct I believe was ingrained into our psyche from the caveman days. It is a survival instinct. And those armchair quarterback's on the jury wanting a guilty verdict obviously have never been threatened or actually been a victim of a crime. That instinctive fear and fight emotion I do not think is immediately controllable in a situation like that; you really don't have the time or the ability to analyze every possible scenario at the moment. It's either fight or flight and flight is not an option when you're in your own castle with other members of your family or tribe to protect. Therefore the assumption that the homeowner fears for his life and limb is a given and it's completely up to the prosecutor to prove that he or she was not in fear of their life. The folks on the jury who held out for a not guilty verdict got it right whether there was 1 or 11 I'm glad they "Stood Their Ground".
 
#21 ·
Criminals have the advantage also that they are prepared. They have thought their act of crime out and are in the moment so to speak. Any victim has the shock of actually being a victim, and the shock of being violated to process prior to reacting. This gives criminals the edge. Like getting in a fistfight. That total shock that your IN IT. Unfortunately many victims can't adjust properly or in time to react and quickly protect themselves, their minds can freeze for a tragic amount of time, giving the criminal more time to attack or flee. Technically when attacked a victim can only use that force necessary to stop the attack, whereas an intruder into ones home should face an immediate death sentence if at all possible. No victim harmed hopefully and NO repeat offender. Win win. My humble opinion.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top