A tale to warm the cockles of one's heart today; the San Francisco Chronicle chronicling Charmaine Taijeron's marital breakdown:
Charmaine Taijeron believed her husband of eight years was taking his time moving out of their apartment [...] The husband, whose name wasn't released, had recently learned about Taijeron's affair, and the couple had decided to separate, authorities said. Taijeron hatched a plan to stage a burglary, hoping to scare her husband into leaving,An ingenious plan it was, too; send some men around to the apartment and give them a key, and get them to scare her husband away. What could possibly go wrong?
Well, one of them (a gentleman by the name of Robert Lindsey) decided to threaten the husband with a gun. Even worse, it was a fake gun. The husband promptly grabbed a knife, fearing for his life, and stabbed Lindsey in the neck; Mr. Lindsey promptly bled out. The police came, there was much to-ing and fro-ing, and the result was that Taijeron, her new boyfriend Matt Parker, Parker's brother and another generic thug were booked on suspicion of murder. The husband by contrast will face no charges. Presumably he can now stay in the apartment, and has just avoided any chance of the divorce costing him anything. Nice one, Mrs. Taijeron. Looking at the mugshots in the articles, the Parker brothers don't appear to be the sharpest knives in the drawer, but may be rocket scientists compared to the late and unlamented Lindsey.
Those of you familiar with the British judicial system will just have choked on your tea and scones.
How could this be? Surely the husband was the killer? Well yes, but:
Prosecutors could charge the four with murder under the state's provocative-act doctrine, which holds accomplices responsible when a crime partner acts in a way that leads to death.California has its share of nutcases and demented laws, but the provocative-act doctrine is something we should take a good look at for the UK. The argument is that it was the criminal actions of Taijeron and her buddies which was responsible for the situation in which the husband found himself; being faced with an apparent gun carried by someone in his apartment with hostile intent, he was legally justified in taking potentially lethal actions in self defence. Can anyone imagine this outcome if the Crown Prosecution Service was involved?