ADVERTISEMENT

UPDATE: Judge Delares Mistrial in Case of Self Defense or 2nd Degree Murder

Cliffs notes?

Car with 2 dudes and 2 women who had been partying it up on xanax the night before tried to do a Dukes of Hazzard drift around a corner in the snow and smashed into a curb. Charlton Heston in another vehicle, that had a bumper sticker saying "Gun control means hitting your target." pulled up behind them to see if they were alright. The Duke boys backed into his car, accidentally. Words were exchanged and the two Duke boys allegedly threatened to beat Heston's ass. Heston returns to his car and retrieves a gun from the glove compartment. He claims the two of them approached him ready to fight and that one spit on him and may have bumped into him and then tried to grab his gun from him. He killed one of the dudes.

The Duke boys, and I believe a bystander in another car, contend that Heston shot without being assaulted and that they never got within 5 feet of him or thereabouts.

Heston is charged with 2nd degree murder for his troubles...
 
I think it would depend on timing. If he "retreated" back to his car, grabbed the gun out of his glove compartment but then pursued or confronted the victim, he may have a problem. Frankly, whether guilty by law or not, this is the issue I've had about this thing from the start. He got the gun out of his glove compartment which means that he could have gotten into his car and locked the doors until police arrived. He re-inserted himself into the confrontation.

His testimony is that he retrieved the gun from the glove compartment and when he looked up, the two guys were about 5 feet from him. His claim is that he then tried to create space between he and the two guys by moving towards the back of his car. It's possible that's the way it went down...it just seems a bit fishy to me that he grabbed the gun out of the glove compartment and didn't just sit in his car prepared to use it if they tried to enter the vehicle...
I think that was the crux of this entire thread... it's duty to retreat, not duty to run away and hide.

At some point you have to blame the aggressors who seemingly kept approaching Weiss and threatening him. If you're going to be a bully and a dude has a gun don't be surprised if you catch the @died.
 
I think that was the crux of this entire thread... it's duty to retreat, not duty to run away and hide.

At some point you have to blame the aggressors who seemingly kept approaching Weiss and threatening him. If you're going to be a bully and a dude has a gun don't be surprised if you catch the @died.

Well, I agree you blame the aggressors for intimidation or assault and they should be held accountable for that. I'm not sure I can agree that you hold them accountable for catching the dead. I put the responsibility of using the gun on the guy holding it and it should be a last resort type of situation. The way I read things, even from Weiss' account, I don't deem it a last resort that he had to shoot the guy. He had an "out" from the confrontation and chose instead to re-insert himself into it.

You can't claim "They were bullying me" if you had an opportunity to escape the bullying.
 
Well, I agree you blame the aggressors for intimidation or assault and they should be held accountable for that. I'm not sure I can agree that you hold them accountable for catching the dead. I put the responsibility of using the gun on the guy holding it and it should be a last resort type of situation. The way I read things, even from Weiss' account, I don't deem it a last resort that he had to shoot the guy. He had an "out" from the confrontation and chose instead to re-insert himself into it.

You can't claim "They were bullying me" if you had an opportunity to escape the bullying.

When does the last resort actually happen? When the two guys start hitting the guy with the gun? Sometime after they have beating the guy?
 
When does the last resort actually happen? When the two guys start hitting the guy with the gun? Sometime after they have beating the guy?

In this case, I think it's if one of them pulls out a gun or if one of them tries to get into the car where the guy with the gun doesn't have a reasonable opportunity to drive away.

I just think him grabbing a gun from his glove compartment and returning to the argument limits his ability to claim self defense. If one of the guys is instantly on him when he gets to his car and he shoots him, I'm good with that. It's that he got out of the car and re-engaged. It shows malice rather than self defense.
 
April 30: Opening remarks heard in Rochester murder trial
From the Collection: Alexander Weiss murder trial in Rochester series
Was a Rochester man using the only choice left available to him when he shot and killed a 17-year-old following a minor traffic crash or did he make an unnecessary and unreasonable choice?

That is the question jurors were presented with Tuesday afternoon in Olmsted County District Court in the case of 26-year-old Alexander Weiss.

Chief Deputy Olmsted County Attorney Eric Woodford and defense attorney James McGeeney presented their opening remarks to the jury, laying out what they expected the evidence to show and preparing jurors for what they would see throughout the case.

Weiss, 26, has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder in connection with the Jan. 14, 2018, confrontation between Weiss and Muhammed Rahim that ensued after a minor automobile crash.

Opening statements began Tuesday, Apr 30, following jury selection, which started Monday, Apr 29, and concluded Tuesday morning, Apr 30. Four men and 10 women were selected from the jury pool.

The trial is expected to take more than a week but less than two weeks.

In advance of the trial last week, Woodford told the judge that the prosecution would likely call 20 to 25 witnesses and that it would take three days to present the evidence in the case.

McGeeney told the judge he might call three character witnesses but that the defense’s case would only take about half a day to present. Weiss is also expected to take the stand in his own defense.
 
Last edited:
Murder suspect takes stand in own defense
From the Collection: Alexander Weiss murder trial in Rochester series
A Rochester man repeatedly told the jury he did not feel safe and was extremely frightened before he shot and killed a 17-year-old last winter following a vehicle accident.

Alexander Weiss, 26, took the stand in his own defense Friday morning, May 3, in the fourth day of his trial in Olmsted County District Court.

Weiss has pleaded not guilty to a second-degree murder charge, in connection with a Jan. 14, 2018, confrontation between Weiss and Muhammed Rahim after a minor automobile crash involving Weiss’ Subaru and the Chevrolet Cavalier Rahim was driving. Weiss claims he acted in self-defense.

During the course of the day Friday, jurors learned why Weiss obtained a permit to carry a gun and what he saw transpire in the minutes before he pulled the trigger that January morning.

Permit to carry

Weiss testified that he sought his permit to carry after several incidents that occurred near him in Rochester. He said he was “fearful of what was going on around me.”

Those incidents included what he described as bloody and violent fights at Rochester Technical Community College and drug activity in the apartment building where he lived after first moving to Rochester from Pine Island.

“I would see people acting suspiciously. I did not feel safe,” Weiss said.

Weiss said that he learned about the state’s use of force laws for civilians while taking his gun permit class.

One shot

On the day of the shooting, Weiss was on his way from his apartment in Olympik Village to Cannon Falls to officiate a youth basketball game. He said he saw a car traveling too fast fly through an intersection, slide laterally and smash into the curb.

Weiss said he pulled past the car and then stopped as he said he wanted to make sure everyone inside the other car was OK. He was still in his own car when he heard the other car’s engine rev and then it “slammed” into him, Weiss said.

Weiss said he got out of the car and it appeared to him as though the other car was starting to drive down the road. Weiss continued to walk toward the car to try and get the license plate. A passenger got out and Weiss said he was expecting to talk to the person and exchange information but the person, later identified as Noah Dukart, was yelling, had his shoulders up and his fists balled.

Dukart was swearing at Weiss and so Weiss said he started to backpedal, to retreat, back to his car. Weiss said that when he told Dukart he was going to call the police, Dukart got more enraged.

Weiss said Dukart threatened to kill him.

“I was extremely frightened,” Weiss told the court

Weiss reached his car, which he had left running with the driver’s door open. He reached in to grab his phone from the center console and then grabbed his gun out of the glove box. Weiss said he grabbed his gun because he was scared and in case Dukart went through on his threat to become physically violent before police arrived.

When Weiss stood up from reaching inside his car, he said he was startled to find Dukart nearby. Weiss said he took a step back against his car and told Dukart to stop. Weiss took a few steps toward the back of his car, in what he said was an effort to create space between himself and Dukart. Weiss said he again told Dukart to stop and told Dukart he had a gun.

Weiss pulled his gun from his pocket and displayed it at his side. He said Dukart paused and then Weiss noticed another person, later identified as Rahim, yelling and approaching him.

Weiss said he put his gun back in his pocket and pulled out his phone to try and call police But he said he wasn’t able to call 911 because his phone didn’t react to his gloved hand. Rahim, Weiss said, continued to approach and yell.

“He said he was going to beat my ass and that they were going to mess me up,” Weiss said.

Weiss said Dukart started to rejoin the confrontation as well. Weiss said he continued to try and create distance between them and, after clearing his car, backpedaled toward the side of the car.

“I was extremely concerned and afraid,” Weiss said. “There were two men erratically behaving, threatening to kill me, blame everything on me.

Weiss said Dukart was on one side of him and Rahim was on the other side when he tried to call 911. Weiss said he believed the call was unsuccessful. The call had actually gone through, but Weiss did not know it.

He said he turned his attention back to Dukart and Rahim. Weiss said Rahim was within five feet of him and started to get a bit more forceful. It was then that Weiss pulled out his firearm again and displayed it at his side. Dukart reacted, but Weiss said Rahim acted as if it didn’t happen. Rahim continued to approach and Weiss said he told Rahim that if he didn’t stop, Weiss would detain him.

Weiss said Rahim laughed, spit on his face, bumped him and attempted to push his firearm and grab at it. Weiss said that after Rahim tried to take the gun, Weiss held the gun level at Rahim, chambered a round and took a two-hand stance.

He said he saw Rahim move his right arm and Weiss shot once.

“I wanted him to stop,” Weiss said. “I was trying to prevent him from taking my firearm.”

DNA evidence

Before Weiss took the stand, McKenzie Anderson a forensic scientist with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, testified that a swab taken from the muzzle and front slide of Weiss’ gun contained a mixture of three or more people’s DNA. One of those people was Weiss, she said. She could not determine the others. Rochester Police Officer Brian Roussell told the jury in his testimony earlier in the week that he had touched Weiss’ gun bare-handed when he removed it from Weiss’ pocket during the initial response.

Swabs taken from the grip and slide of Weiss’ gun contained a mixture of four or more people’s DNA, but Anderson said all were insufficient to determine to whom it belonged.

The swab taken from Weiss’ face where he had said Rahim spit on him was found to only have Weiss’ DNA, Anderson testified.

Sgt. Steven Thompson was called back Friday afternoon to testify again for the prosecution but during cross-examination clarified that the swab of Weiss’ face was taken later in the morning of the incident, after Weiss had been interviewed and after Weiss’ was seen crying with his head in his hands after learning Rahim had died.

Weiss testified that when he learned Rahim died, he was “devastated.”

“I thought he was still alive,” Weiss said.

During cross-examination by Woodford, Weiss told the jury he typically carried his gun with him and openly carried on his job as an assistant officer manager for a construction company.

Weiss was also questioned about one of the four bumper stickers on his car. It said “gun control means hitting your target.” McGeeney later questioned Weiss about the three other bumper stickers—– one was about welfare, the other about liking black labs and the third about supporting police.

Woodford also questioned Weiss on the description he gave police that day about the physical contact he had with Rahim.

Weiss reportedly told officers that day, “I don’t know if I’d call it a push.”

When questioned by Woodford, Weiss said he had been worried that Dukart and Rahim would knock him out, beat him and then the two girls in Rahim’s car would join in.

Jurors learned that about 90 seconds passed between when Weiss got his gun and fired the shot.

Weiss did not suffer any physical injuries.

As part of the defense’s case, McGeeney called a Rochester police officer who had previously testified, Roussell, and Sgt. Eric Boynton, who interviewed Dukart. Jurors were given special instructions regarding the consideration they should give to Boynton’s testimony about what Dukart said during the interview on the day of the shooting.

Jurors were dismissed Friday afternoon and told to return Monday afternoon. Before leaving, the 10 women and four men of the jury were cautioned not to discuss the case during the weekend. Judge Joseph Chase told the jurors that on Monday afternoon they would receive their instructions and hear closing arguments before they would begin their deliberations. If the jury does not reach a verdict Monday night, Chase said they would be sequestered.
 
Last edited:
In this case, I think it's if one of them pulls out a gun or if one of them tries to get into the car where the guy with the gun doesn't have a reasonable opportunity to drive away.

I just think him grabbing a gun from his glove compartment and returning to the argument limits his ability to claim self defense. If one of the guys is instantly on him when he gets to his car and he shoots him, I'm good with that. It's that he got out of the car and re-engaged. It shows malice rather than self defense.
Pretty tough to call him the aggressor when he showed his weapon and then put it in his pocket while trying to call 911... if he had gotten his gun and came out a shot them, maybe. That doesn't fit the Charles Bronson vigilante mold.

Now all the sudden the mouth gets a case of the forget-me-nots and can't remember what he said to the cops at the scene. 2 guys amped up on Xany-bars playing Tokyo Drift and acting all big and bad messed with the wrong guy and the mouth is lucky his ass didn't get shot too.

Play stupid games, get stupid prizes.
 
“One is not guilty of a crime if one acts in self-defense,” Chase said, adding there are four elements necessary for something to be self-defense:

• The act must have been done in the belief it was necessary to avert death.

• The judgement of the actor must have been reasonable.

• The decision was one a reasonable person would have made.

• There was no reasonable possibility of retreat.


OK, HROT!!!!

GUILTY?

or

NOT GUILTY!!!
 
Dukart was one of 4 people in the other vehicle; Dukart got out of the car first.

As you can see, Dukart wanted a 2 on 1 fight.

During Dukart's testimony:

Upon cross-examination, Dukart said he didn’t remember too much of the interview he’d given to police shortly after the incident.

McGeeney (the defense attorney) asked Dukart more than a dozen questions about what he’d said during that interview, quoting from notes he had taken from a prepared transcript. During that interview, Dukart reportedly told police he threatened Weiss, referred to Rahim as a big, tough guy that liked to intimidate people and that Dukart wanted to fight two-on-one.

Each time McGeeney asked Dukart if he remembered making a statement, Dukart responded no. When asked if “no” meant he denied saying those things, Dukart said no meant he didn’t remember saying those things
.

Dukart did deny that Rahim bumped Weiss in the chest, although he told police in his interview that had happened.


LINK: https://www.postbulletin.com/news/p...cle_9aa3679c-6d33-11e9-b946-53dcc98fba21.html
 
In this case, I think it's if one of them pulls out a gun or if one of them tries to get into the car where the guy with the gun doesn't have a reasonable opportunity to drive away.

I just think him grabbing a gun from his glove compartment and returning to the argument limits his ability to claim self defense. If one of the guys is instantly on him when he gets to his car and he shoots him, I'm good with that. It's that he got out of the car and re-engaged. It shows malice rather than self defense.

You think he should wait until one of the guys is on him is when he should be able to use his gun? How would that work?
 
The potential of being beaten up shouldn't allow for someone to carry out a death sentence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FSUTribe76
You think he should wait until one of the guys is on him is when he should be able to use his gun? How would that work?
There have been 2 recent deaths in Minnesota related to permit to carry:

* This case, where one person was shot & killed and the shooter claimed self defense.

The shooter is on trial.

There will probably be a civil lawsuit as well, where the shooter could be liable for damages.

* Philando Castile, a 32-year-old black American, had a permit to carry; his car was pulled over while driving in Falcon Heights, Minnesota, and killed by Jeronimo Yanez, a St. Anthony, Minnesota Latino police officer. Castile told the officer he legally was carrying a gun; nevertheless, he ended up dead.

The shooter (the police officer) went on trial & was acquitted.

The city paid out millions in a civil lawsuit.


I have no desire to ever own a hand gun, let alone a permit to carry it. It seems like there are only bad outcomes & criminal and civil trials when handguns & the related permits to carry are involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FSUTribe76
The potential of being beaten up shouldn't allow for someone to carry out a death sentence.
this is where it gets tricky. so the defendant should just accept a 2 on 1 situation?

If the defendant feared great bodily harm & the jury agrees, he will likely be found not guilty. NOTE that the decease grabbing for the gun could have caused the gun to go off, causing that great bodily harm.

the danger for the defendant, of course, is that in his desire to own a guy, have a permit to carry it, and use that gun in what he thought was self defense, he has put his freedom in the hands of a jury.

that is why i said in the post above that owning a hand gun is not worth it and having a permit to carry in public is most definitely not worth it.
 
You think he should wait until one of the guys is on him is when he should be able to use his gun? How would that work?

When I say "on him" I meant at the door of his car. Like imminent threat where the guy is clearly coming after you into your domain (the car.) I don't mean like on top of you physically necessarily.

Once Weiss steps out with the gun, to me he's re-entering a confrontation and he's now a mutual aggressor that knows he has the upper hand since he has a weapon. That's no longer self-defense to me.
 
The shooter had plenty of opportunities to get out of the situation but instead he remained and engaged the other parties eventually with deadly force. He’ll probably be found not guilty but I won’t feel one bit sorry for him if he’s found guilty and goes to prison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FSUTribe76
The shooter had plenty of opportunities to get out of the situation but instead he remained and engaged the other parties eventually with deadly force. He’ll probably be found not guilty but I won’t feel one bit sorry for him if he’s found guilty and goes to prison.
in a normal situation, the accident happens, you call 911, exchange insurance info and wait for the police to arrive and issue a ticket to the teenager.

this was a weird, weird situation, obviously.

was it the 2 teens who were the aggressors, who kept coming at the defendant? it appears so.

did the deceased grab at the gun? it appears so, based on DNA found on the gun (but tests were not conclusive).

lets face it; shooting a gun in a minor fender bender seems way, way extreme.

but, did the shooting meet the 4 self defense requirements? if so, he might get off.

its up to the jury to decide. i could see it going either way, based on:
* who do they believe? the defendant or the teenager, whose story changed?
* did the shooting meet the self defense requirements?
* the instructions given to the jury before they go to deliberate.

but like i said in a post earlier, the next thing that is coming is the civil lawsuit, where the defendant is gonna be sued for a ton of money.

think of the cost to the defendant for the lawyer fees for all of this. and then the cost if he loses the civil case.

is owning a hand gun and having a permit to carry really worth it? I don't think so because if you ever think you have to use that gun, look at what might happen in the aftermath: Getting arrested, facing a criminal trial and facing a civil trial.
 
this is where it gets tricky. so the defendant should just accept a 2 on 1 situation?

If the defendant feared great bodily harm & the jury agrees, he will likely be found not guilty. NOTE that the decease grabbing for the gun could have caused the gun to go off, causing that great bodily harm.

the danger for the defendant, of course, is that in his desire to own a guy, have a permit to carry it, and use that gun in what he thought was self defense, he has put his freedom in the hands of a jury.

that is why i said in the post above that owning a hand gun is not worth it and having a permit to carry in public is most definitely not worth it.

If he doesn’t have that gun, he probably seeks to de-escalate that situation and get away. Having the gun caused him to introduce a much higher likelihood of deadly violence.
 
in a normal situation, the accident happens, you call 911, exchange insurance info and wait for the police to arrive and issue a ticket to the teenager.

this was a weird, weird situation, obviously.

was it the 2 teens who were the aggressors, who kept coming at the defendant? it appears so.

did the deceased grab at the gun? it appears so, based on DNA found on the gun (but tests were not conclusive).

lets face it; shooting a gun in a minor fender bender seems way, way extreme.

but, did the shooting meet the 4 self defense requirements? if so, he might get off.

its up to the jury to decide. i could see it going either way, based on:
* who do they believe? the defendant or the teenager, whose story changed?
* did the shooting meet the self defense requirements?
* the instructions given to the jury before they go to deliberate.

but like i said in a post earlier, the next thing that is coming is the civil lawsuit, where the defendant is gonna be sued for a ton of money.

think of the cost to the defendant for the lawyer fees for all of this. and then the cost if he loses the civil case.

is owning a hand gun and having a permit to carry really worth it? I don't think so because if you ever think you have to use that gun, look at what might happen in the aftermath: Getting arrested, facing a criminal trial and facing a civil trial.

It's a big responsibility carrying a weapon in public. I think it should be much more difficult to get a ccw. I'm a gun owner and support most gun rights but those laws need change.

It should be a last resort after you've done everything you can to escape the confrontation.
 
It's a big responsibility carrying a weapon in public. I think it should be much more difficult to get a ccw. I'm a gun owner and support most gun rights but those laws need change.

It should be a last resort after you've done everything you can to escape the confrontation.
I suspect you are really anti-gun and no matter what the situation you would rationalize somehow the situation could have been avoided and the shooter will always be in the wrong. "Last resort" is a tough standard... its like trying to catch a falling knife... or wait until a stock has hit rock bottom and sell. Hindsight is always 20/20 and you just have to hope people make the best decision possible.

But in this case... just based on the articles I've read and my understanding of them, Weiss saw a car crash and stopped to make sure everyone was ok, then the car slammed into his, he got out (for who knows what... see the damage on his, get the license of the car or exchange info for insurance) and then the amped up guys wanted to pick a fight. They bullied a guy who had a gun and I'm sure it was a highly stressful situation for him. Again from what I've read, Weiss tried to retreat, he showed his gun and then put it away, he was constantly approached by the other 2, he ended up behind his car. How are you ever supposed to know when all possible scenarios are exhausted?

Cops who are trained for high stress situations and soldiers on the battlefield are not held to the standards we hold civilians in similar difficult incidents.

This entire scenario lays squarely on the feet of the dead guy and the mouthy one. Did their actions deserve for them to die? Absolutely not. But when you engage in hostile activities vs a guy who has shown you he has a gun... that's on you.

Just think about this for 1 sec. He told the cops, that day, at the scene he and the dead guy wanted to get into a 2 on 1 fight and the dead guy was very big and intimidating... He told that to the cops! What do you think he really did?? I would bet a ton of money it was much worse, much worse. 2 guys who had taken drugs the night before wanting to fight someone 2 on 1... smh.
 
I suspect you are really anti-gun and no matter what the situation you would rationalize somehow the situation could have been avoided and the shooter will always be in the wrong. "Last resort" is a tough standard... its like trying to catch a falling knife... or wait until a stock has hit rock bottom and sell. Hindsight is always 20/20 and you just have to hope people make the best decision possible.

But in this case... just based on the articles I've read and my understanding of them, Weiss saw a car crash and stopped to make sure everyone was ok, then the car slammed into his, he got out (for who knows what... see the damage on his, get the license of the car or exchange info for insurance) and then the amped up guys wanted to pick a fight. They bullied a guy who had a gun and I'm sure it was a highly stressful situation for him. Again from what I've read, Weiss tried to retreat, he showed his gun and then put it away, he was constantly approached by the other 2, he ended up behind his car. How are you ever supposed to know when all possible scenarios are exhausted?

Cops who are trained for high stress situations and soldiers on the battlefield are not held to the standards we hold civilians in similar difficult incidents.

This entire scenario lays squarely on the feet of the dead guy and the mouthy one. Did their actions deserve for them to die? Absolutely not. But when you engage in hostile activities vs a guy who has shown you he has a gun... that's on you.

Just think about this for 1 sec. He told the cops, that day, at the scene he and the dead guy wanted to get into a 2 on 1 fight and the dead guy was very big and intimidating... He told that to the cops! What do you think he really did?? I would bet a ton of money it was much worse, much worse. 2 guys who had taken drugs the night before wanting to fight someone 2 on 1... smh.

You're completely wrong if you think I'm anti-gun. I own 15 of them ranging from pistol to high powered-rifle. I have a lot of respect for guns and what they can do...that's why I'm all for trying to keep them in responsible, trained, hands.

Your synopsis of the incident with Weiss is close but it has one glaring flaw to me. He wasn't armed when the confrontation began as you make it seem. He left the confrontation to retrieve the gun from his glove compartment. He then returned to the fracas that he clearly knew was escalating. At that point, he becomes culpable. He was physically in his car and could have closed and locked the doors or driven down the block until police arrived. He chose instead to go on the offensive with a loaded weapon.

The two guys that were trying to intimidate him aren't without fault here. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that they should have been arrested for threats or for assault if one did spit on Weiss or "bump him" as he said. That's for the cops to figure out. That's not for Weiss to go all Dirty Harry and take matters into his own hands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinehawk
The potential of being beaten up shouldn't allow for someone to carry out a death sentence.

Why would you think they would have stopped with just a beating? I'm trying to figure out what the mindset is around this. Would you allow 2 guys to beat you?
 
Why would you think they would have stopped with just a beating? I'm trying to figure out what the mindset is around this. Would you allow 2 guys to beat you?

Why do you think they wouldn't?
No, I would try to get away.
I go get a gun in that situation and there is a good chance that life changing (or ending) things are about to happen.
 
You're completely wrong if you think I'm anti-gun. I own 15 of them ranging from pistol to high powered-rifle. I have a lot of respect for guns and what they can do...that's why I'm all for trying to keep them in responsible, trained, hands.

Your synopsis of the incident with Weiss is close but it has one glaring flaw to me. He wasn't armed when the confrontation began as you make it seem. He left the confrontation to retrieve the gun from his glove compartment. He then returned to the fracas that he clearly knew was escalating. At that point, he becomes culpable. He was physically in his car and could have closed and locked the doors or driven down the block until police arrived. He chose instead to go on the offensive with a loaded weapon.

The two guys that were trying to intimidate him aren't without fault here. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that they should have been arrested for threats or for assault if one did spit on Weiss or "bump him" as he said. That's for the cops to figure out. That's not for Weiss to go all Dirty Harry and take matters into his own hands.
Again, that is easy to say 6 months later without 2 guys threatening you. He maybe makes 1 mistake and the other guys make a dozen... the least of which driving, maybe under the influence, like madmen on the streets of Minnesota.

I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a seemingly good guy (Weiss) over 2 drugged up thugs looking to pick a fight. I'm perfectly fine with culling out the bullies.
 
Why do you think they wouldn't?
No, I would try to get away.
I go get a gun in that situation and there is a good chance that life changing (or ending) things are about to happen.

I grew up in a bad neighborhood. The street rule was that if you get in a fight, you beat the other guy until he has no chance of hitting you back. I think I'd assume if two guys are coming after me, I'll end up dead or in the hospital.
 
Again, that is easy to say 6 months later without 2 guys threatening you. He maybe makes 1 mistake and the other guys make a dozen... the least of which driving, maybe under the influence, like madmen on the streets of Minnesota.

I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a seemingly good guy (Weiss) over 2 drugged up thugs looking to pick a fight. I'm perfectly fine with culling out the bullies.

His one mistake trumped all of their mistakes combined. It ended in the death of someone. If their driving had killed someone or their thuggery had killed or hurt someone, they would be the ones on trial. That's not what happened.

You can't just kill someone because you are in the right and they are a jackass. No matter how good it feels to you that a "bully" was killed, it's wrong. Secondly, who is the "bully" I'd argue that Weiss becomes the bully when he grabs the gun and sets out after unarmed men...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinehawk
His one mistake trumped all of their mistakes combined. It ended in the death of someone. If their driving had killed someone or their thuggery had killed or hurt someone, they would be the ones on trial. That's not what happened.

You can't just kill someone because you are in the right and they are a jackass. No matter how good it feels to you that a "bully" was killed, it's wrong. Secondly, who is the "bully" I'd argue that Weiss becomes the bully when he grabs the gun and sets out after unarmed men...
tenor.gif
 
His one mistake trumped all of their mistakes combined. It ended in the death of someone. If their driving had killed someone or their thuggery had killed or hurt someone, they would be the ones on trial. That's not what happened.

You can't just kill someone because you are in the right and they are a jackass. No matter how good it feels to you that a "bully" was killed, it's wrong. Secondly, who is the "bully" I'd argue that Weiss becomes the bully when he grabs the gun and sets out after unarmed men...

Agreed, much like George Zimmerman, he took actions that weren't necessary, that ultimately led to a shooting death. He had opportunities to extract himself from what he described as a scary situation. So hwy not just leave at that point? You can memorize their license plate # as you drive away safely.
 
Agreed, much like George Zimmerman, he took actions that weren't necessary, that ultimately led to a shooting death. He had opportunities to extract himself from what he described as a scary situation. So hwy not just leave at that point? You can memorize their license plate # as you drive away safely.

This is nothing like the Zimmerman - Martin situation.
 
I disagree, they both had opportunities to extract themselves from the situations presented, but chose instead to engage with a firearm at their side.

Zimmerman stalked Martin and was the aggressor the entire time. Martin was in fear for his life. It's opposite of this situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gimmered
It's a big responsibility carrying a weapon in public. I think it should be much more difficult to get a ccw. I'm a gun owner and support most gun rights but those laws need change.

It should be a last resort after you've done everything you can to escape the confrontation.
yeah, i am big time conflicted with this case. i bet the jurors will be, too.

seriously, on one hand, it was a fender bender!! how many of those end up with someone dead? Just does not make sense.

However, when you apply the MN self defense law, the jury will deliberate whether or not it was self defense (there are 4 components) and whether firing the gun was justified or not.

It will be interesting.

Either way, the defendant has another trial coming up: the civil one.

Think of the money he has lost to date on lawyer fees and the money he will lose moving forward when he loses the civil case.

Is carrying a gun in public worth all this?
 
If he doesn’t have that gun, he probably seeks to de-escalate that situation and get away. Having the gun caused him to introduce a much higher likelihood of deadly violence.
or did the legally possessed gun help him defend himself from harm from 2 men who were being aggressive towards the defendant?

it will be interesting to see what the jury says.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Finance85
You're completely wrong if you think I'm anti-gun. I own 15 of them ranging from pistol to high powered-rifle. I have a lot of respect for guns and what they can do...that's why I'm all for trying to keep them in responsible, trained, hands.

Your synopsis of the incident with Weiss is close but it has one glaring flaw to me. He wasn't armed when the confrontation began as you make it seem. He left the confrontation to retrieve the gun from his glove compartment. He then returned to the fracas that he clearly knew was escalating. At that point, he becomes culpable. He was physically in his car and could have closed and locked the doors or driven down the block until police arrived. He chose instead to go on the offensive with a loaded weapon.

The two guys that were trying to intimidate him aren't without fault here. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that they should have been arrested for threats or for assault if one did spit on Weiss or "bump him" as he said. That's for the cops to figure out. That's not for Weiss to go all Dirty Harry and take matters into his own hands.
it is my understanding that Weiss went to his car to get his phone to call 911

when the friend followed him is when Weiss also got his gun

to me, Weiss retreated to his car AND the one dude followed Weiss; and then the deceased guy approached

the 2 teens were the ones approaching and being aggressive

It will all come down to what is laid out in court.

Did Weiss legally retreat? Did he legally meet the self defense requirements? I think you can make the argument that he did. But i bet there will be jurors that argue he didn't. So a hung jury might occur.

All I know is I am glad I am not in his shoes.
 
yeah, i am big time conflicted with this case. i bet the jurors will be, too.

seriously, on one hand, it was a fender bender!! how many of those end up with someone dead? Just does not make sense.

However, when you apply the MN self defense law, the jury will deliberate whether or not it was self defense (there are 4 components) and whether firing the gun was justified or not.

It will be interesting.

Either way, the defendant has another trial coming up: the civil one.

Think of the money he has lost to date on lawyer fees and the money he will lose moving forward when he loses the civil case.

Is carrying a gun in public worth all this?
I'd rather be alive and broke than dead and have a million dollar funeral.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT