The current case involves a 30 year old single female called Jane and a 35 year old man named Jason. Jane lives in an apartment building alone and has not taken self-defense course. Jason, on the other hand, lives the next door and is known for his excessive drinking habits and pranking issues. The main issue that needs to be determined in the present case is whether it was legal for Jane to shoot Jason after the latter intruded her house.
The issue of people using guns to protect themselves from intruders has been a major concern in the legal system. Under the English common law, a home can be considered to be someone’s castle. Therefore, people have the right to protect their homes and defend themselves when invaded by strangers. The modern American law also addresses the issue. In this case, someone cannot be thrown to jail for using deadly force against an unlawful intruder ( Randall, M., & DeBoer, 2012; Shorter v. Shelton, 1945 ). Furthermore, a person does not have to retreat from the home even if he or she can do so. All the states have adopted some variations of the legal doctrine and used it as the basis for dealing with cases involving illegal intrusion of homes.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Castle Doctrine allows a person to establish self-defense justification for using legal force against a person who intrudes into your home ( CPS, 2019 ). Furthermore, the doctrine may shield a person from criminal prosecution and civil liability for shooting unarmed prowler and inebriated neighbor who breaks into you garage or house. Every state has its version of the doctrine which offers legal protecting for use of force when confronting a stranger. In places where the broad version of the doctrine has been adopted, a person has a right to use deadly force against any person who has broken into your house. Other states have adopted a narrowed approach that requires evidence that the intruder wanted to commit a felony.
The Castle Doctrine provides a basis for determining the case involving Jane and Jason. Jane decided to retrieve and use the gun after she was invaded by Jason. Jason was wearing scary costume and threatened to take Jane to hell. It is also imperative to note that Jane has not taken any self-defense course and was scared of the huge man who appeared in her house out of nowhere. Jason kept charging towards Jane and it was at this point that the latter decided to shoot the intruder. The CCTV records clearly supports the statements that Jane made regarding the issue. Jason, on the other hand, is claiming that he did not have the intention to harm Jane. His arguments do not negate the fact that he scared Jane and had unlawfully intruded his neighbor’s house. Therefore, Jane had the legal right to protect herself and her property using force. It is also worth stating that factors such as sex and age may have influenced Jane to react the way she did. She is a lady who lives alone in an apartment and was scared of the sight of the man who had intruded her home. As a result, she need to use force against the individual who forcibly and unlawfully entered her home.
The present case relates to an issue that has attracted the attention of legal experts, researchers, and the general public. From time to time, people may face intruders who forcibly get into their houses. Out of fear, the individual in question may decide to use force to protect themselves or their property. The Castle Doctrine gives legal protection to people like Jane who shot the intruder. Therefore, she cannot be prosecuted for shooting Jason since she was acting within her legal rights.
References
CPS. (2019). Self-defense and the prevention of crime . https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/self-defence-and-prevention-crime#Reasonable_Force
Randall, M., & DeBoer, H. (2012). The Castle Doctrine and Stand-your-Ground Law. Connecticut General Assembly . The State of Connecticut .
Shorter v. Shelton (1945) 183 Va. 819, 826-827
