Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
I mean, for all you know, the kid was all like, "Oh crap, they forgot to lower their garage door. I'll get that shut for them so they don't get robbed.

Y'know, knowing the few Germans I know, this is highly probable. Or he was looking to see if there was someone in there or in the house to notify.

I wouldn't bet on it. Ask your German friends what they think of Turkish immigrants in Germany. The stereotype isn't anywhere near as positive.

This guy had no business sneaking into other people's garages at night. I wouldn't have been baited by that, but then I'm not a thief! A genuinely concerned person would have just knocked at the front door. Here is a still just before the shooting. He isn't just poking his head inside, he's right in there mooching around with a fething flashlight.


My gut feeling: 99% chance this is either the guy responsible for the string of burglaries, or another opportunist thief. I have no sympathy for him. Of course that isn't enough to condone his execution, so I would never defend the shooters actions. If it was me and I spotted the guy I suspected of burgling my house, sneaking into my garage... and I was armed, then I'd go in there and arrest him (I might also kick him in the face a few times and say he resisted... maybe).

So someone else who agrees it's a flashlight.

Therefore the shooter lied about not being able to see him, which means he can also be charged with obstructing the course of justice.

Also, he's not wearing gloves. What burglar nowadays (especially one who, according to some people, we are now to believe has broken into this house twice or other houses on the street) doesn't wear gloves?

There's nothing wrong with the Castle doctrine. But this guy is a maniac, and that's why he's being charged.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
So someone else who agrees it's a flashlight.

Therefore the shooter lied about not being able to see him, which means he can also be charged with obstructing the course of justice.

Also, he's not wearing gloves. What burglar nowadays doesn't wear gloves?

This isn't an episode of CSI, and I doubt that Turkish kid was a career criminal. A Halloween costume is not a requirement to commit crimes, lol.

And sure, the guy who shot him was a turd. Who is arguing otherwise at this point? I just don't understand why you're so quick to defend someone who has pretty much no alibi. "What ifs" are not alibis, and from the statement of the shooters they had reason to believe he had done this on their property before. There hasn't been any proof that they are lying about this so far, nor any proof that they just wanted to shoot somebody for the fun of it. It looks very much like these people saw this idiot breaking into their property multiple times, and decided to go full idiot themselves and kill him.

Where is your evidence that he was just there for hugs and kisses?

 ZultanQ wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
So someone else who agrees it's a flashlight.

Therefore the shooter lied about not being able to see him, which means he can also be charged with obstructing the course of justice.

Also, he's not wearing gloves. What burglar nowadays doesn't wear gloves?

This isn't an episode of CSI, and I doubt that Turkish kid was a career criminal. A Halloween costume is not a requirement to commit crimes, lol.

And sure, the guy who shot him was a turd. Who is arguing otherwise at this point? I just don't understand why you're so quick to defend someone who has pretty much no alibi. "What ifs" are not alibis, and from the statement of the shooters they had reason to believe he had done this on their property before. There hasn't been any proof that they are lying about this so far, nor any proof that they just wanted to shoot somebody for the fun of it. It looks very much like these people saw this idiot breaking into their property multiple times, and decided to go full idiot themselves and kill him.

Where is your evidence that he was just there for hugs and kisses?

Innocent until proven guilty, I'm afraid. Not the other way around. Foundation of most modern justice systems.

So I don't have to prove jack that he was there for hugs and kisses. You have to prove he was there to steal. If you can't do that then you can stop claiming it as fact.

Also, yet again you claim that they had seen him before but I haven't seen that in any of the news stories.

Statement from the shooters lawyer: 'We know with no question the individual entered the garage. Kaarma didn't know who he was, his intent or whether he was armed,'
So no, Kaarma had not seen him breaking in before so stop saying that.

 Jihadin wrote:
Ensis that's a bit going to far. Open garage at night is not my issue. Open garage at night and I see a body on the ground or something then aye I see your view. Its middle of the night keep that in mind.

I agree it's a bit too far, especially for middle of the night. However, what was asked for was an example in which one could be in the garage in the middle of the night, and NOT be up to bad things. As it is, I have enough crap on my plate that if I see an open garage, middle of the night or not, I'm probably going to continue on my merry way, give a "snort of derision" and mutter something about them being idiots for leaving the garage open.




As to the German stereotypes on Turkish immigrants, they are definitely less than positive, however, aside from the one unreliable English paper, have we really seen anything more reputable to suggest that he is actually a German Turk?

Well no one can prove anything because the psychopath shot him 4 times with a shotgun.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
So someone else who agrees it's a flashlight.

Therefore the shooter lied about not being able to see him, which means he can also be charged with obstructing the course of justice.

Also, he's not wearing gloves. What burglar nowadays doesn't wear gloves?

This isn't an episode of CSI, and I doubt that Turkish kid was a career criminal. A Halloween costume is not a requirement to commit crimes, lol.

And sure, the guy who shot him was a turd. Who is arguing otherwise at this point? I just don't understand why you're so quick to defend someone who has pretty much no alibi. "What ifs" are not alibis, and from the statement of the shooters they had reason to believe he had done this on their property before. There hasn't been any proof that they are lying about this so far, nor any proof that they just wanted to shoot somebody for the fun of it. It looks very much like these people saw this idiot breaking into their property multiple times, and decided to go full idiot themselves and kill him.

Where is your evidence that he was just there for hugs and kisses?

Innocent until proven guilty, I'm afraid. Not the other way around. Foundation of most modern justice systems.

So I don't have to prove jack that he was there for hugs and kisses. You have to prove he was there to steal. If you can't do that then you can stop claiming it as fact.

It is very easy to prove that he is guilty of trespassing.

 ZultanQ wrote:


It is very easy to prove that he is guilty of trespassing.

Last I checked, trespassing was not a capital offence.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

As to the German stereotypes on Turkish immigrants, they are definitely less than positive, however, aside from the one unreliable English paper, have we really seen anything more reputable to suggest that he is actually a German Turk?

The family moved to Hamburg in 1977. Dede was 17 years old. So he was born in Germany and his family had lived in Germany for 29 years.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:


It is very easy to prove that he is guilty of trespassing.

Last I checked, trespassing was not a capital offence.

In castle doctrine it is completely legal to use lethal force against someone who is trespassing if you believe they are there to cause harm to you or your property.

It's a good thing we're profiling people by stereotypes now. A faster and more effective way to blame the victim!

In saying that, it is odd that he's walking around the garage with a flashlight, it certainly appears as if he was intending to take something. Although what bearing him being a Turkish German has I don't understand.

 ZultanQ wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:


It is very easy to prove that he is guilty of trespassing.

Last I checked, trespassing was not a capital offence.

In castle doctrine it is completely legal to use lethal force against someone who is trespassing if you believe they are there to cause harm to you or your property.

No, castle doctrine doesn't make it legal to shoot someone because you think they'll harm your property. It's for self-defense if you reasonably believe you or someone else are at risk of death or grievous bodily injury.

 ZultanQ wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
So someone else who agrees it's a flashlight.

Therefore the shooter lied about not being able to see him, which means he can also be charged with obstructing the course of justice.

Also, he's not wearing gloves. What burglar nowadays doesn't wear gloves?

This isn't an episode of CSI, and I doubt that Turkish kid was a career criminal. A Halloween costume is not a requirement to commit crimes, lol.

Who said anything about "a Halloween costume"?

Gloves would be a common sense move, especially since the German kid(whether his parents were Turkish immigrants or not has no relevance on this case beyond being a biasing factor perpetrated by the Daily Fail since Turkish immigrants are looked at in roughly the same light in Europe as Latino immigrants are here in the United States) is an exchange student and likely would have been fingerprinted when entering the country. They would have been an even more common sense move if in fact he were the person who had been breaking into these houses.

And sure, the guy who shot him was a turd. Who is arguing otherwise at this point? I just don't understand why you're so quick to defend someone who has pretty much no alibi. "What ifs" are not alibis, and from the statement of the shooters they had reason to believe he had done this on their property before. There hasn't been any proof that they are lying about this so far, nor any proof that they just wanted to shoot somebody for the fun of it. It looks very much like these people saw this idiot breaking into their property multiple times, and decided to go full idiot themselves and kill him.

Where is your evidence that he was just there for hugs and kisses?

Have you ever lived in a relatively friendly neighborhood? Where I live, we leave our garage doors open as a pretty regular thing. Most of my neighbors don't lock their doors or arm their security systems unless they're going out of town for an extended period of time.
It's a common thing amongst my neighbors to walk into someone else's garage and borrow things without asking--because those same things will generally get returned without you needing to prompt someone.

Anyways, the shooters did NOT "have reason to believe he had done this on their property before". There was nothing suggesting that they had ever seen the individual who had broken into their house before, seeing as how they went out of their way on this occasion to put out a camera this time to try to "catch someone in the act".
They saw someone in their garage and they shot first without challenging the individual.

 Medium of Death wrote:
It's a good thing we're profiling people by stereotypes now. A faster and more effective way to blame the victim!

In saying that, it is odd that he's walking around the garage with a flashlight, it certainly appears as if he was intending to take something. Although what bearing him being a Turkish German has I don't understand.

It has no bearing at all, I simply called him a Turk because he is, but he's also a German, it's just semantics. But immediately the race card came out and suddenly anybody who doesn't believe he's innocent is a racist victim blamer. So the take home message here is that white guilt liberals never fail to entertain, and will always make race an issue when possible.

Dede is a victim and a probable criminal. Blaming him for being a criminal is not the same as blaming him for being a victim.

 Smacks wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
I mean, for all you know, the kid was all like, "Oh crap, they forgot to lower their garage door. I'll get that shut for them so they don't get robbed.

Y'know, knowing the few Germans I know, this is highly probable. Or he was looking to see if there was someone in there or in the house to notify.

I wouldn't bet on it. Ask your German friends what they think of Turkish immigrants in Germany. The stereotype isn't anywhere near as positive.

This guy had no business sneaking into other people's garages at night. I wouldn't have been baited by that, but then I'm not a thief! A genuinely concerned person would have just knocked at the front door. Here is a still just before the shooting. He isn't just poking his head inside, he's right in there mooching around with a fething flashlight.


My gut feeling: 99% chance this is either the guy responsible for the string of burglaries, or another opportunist thief. I have no sympathy for him. Of course that isn't enough to condone his execution, so I would never defend the shooters actions. If it was me and I spotted the guy I suspected of burgling my house, sneaking into my garage... and I was armed, then I'd go in there and arrest him (I might also kick him in the face a few times and say he resisted... maybe).

Without seeing video footage it's hard to say for sure, but it does not really look like he's there to steal anything.
It does not appear that he is looking around, but rather facing straight ahead towards where the door to the interior of the house or the garage door control panel would be . Nothing about his posture suggests furtiveness or the kind of edginess that one would expect from an individual who knows they are somewhere they do not belong.

Also notice that he's not looking into the car windows(at least in this photo), which is part of the shooter's claim as to "what caused them to think this was the burglar".

 Medium of Death wrote:
It's a good thing we're profiling people by stereotypes now. A faster and more effective way to blame the victim!

We are all ab out efficiency here at the OT.

 ZultanQ wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
It's a good thing we're profiling people by stereotypes now. A faster and more effective way to blame the victim!

In saying that, it is odd that he's walking around the garage with a flashlight, it certainly appears as if he was intending to take something. Although what bearing him being a Turkish German has I don't understand.

It has no bearing at all, I simply called him a Turk because he is, but he's also a German, it's just semantics. But immediately the race card came out and suddenly anybody who doesn't believe he's innocent is a racist victim blamer. So the take home message here is that white guilt liberals never fail to entertain, and will always make race an issue when possible.

Dede is a victim and a probable criminal. Blaming him for being a criminal is not the same as blaming him for being a victim.

Ethnicity != Race.

 ZultanQ wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
It's a good thing we're profiling people by stereotypes now. A faster and more effective way to blame the victim!

In saying that, it is odd that he's walking around the garage with a flashlight, it certainly appears as if he was intending to take something. Although what bearing him being a Turkish German has I don't understand.

It has no bearing at all, I simply called him a Turk because he is, but he's also a German, it's just semantics. But immediately the race card came out and suddenly anybody who doesn't believe he's innocent is a racist victim blamer. So the take home message here is that white guilt liberals never fail to entertain, and will always make race an issue when possible.

Dede is a victim and a probable criminal. Blaming him for being a criminal is not the same as blaming him for being a victim.

He was born in Germany, he's German. He is of Turkish descent but that's not the same as being Turkish, in fact it's the same as an American who had ancestors 100 years ago in Ireland saying that they're of Irish descent. That doesn't make the American Irish and it doesn't make him any more Turkish than German. By referring to him as a Turk rather than a German you are bringing race into it.

 Hordini wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:


It is very easy to prove that he is guilty of trespassing.

Last I checked, trespassing was not a capital offence.

In castle doctrine it is completely legal to use lethal force against someone who is trespassing if you believe they are there to cause harm to you or your property.

No, castle doctrine doesn't make it legal to shoot someone because you think they'll harm your property. It's for self-defense if you reasonably believe you or someone else are at risk of death or grievous bodily injury.

Well perhaps it's the fault of my poor wording, but where I live it is most definitely legal to shoot someone if they are attempting to steal your car for example.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm

It's pretty damn hard to argue that you were scared enough to kill somebody when you:

1) Were not scared enough to leave the garage door open.
2) Were not scared enough to bait the garage to make sure that somebody enters it.
3) Were not scared enough to call 911.
4) Were not scared enough to not sneak around behind them to make sure you get them just where you want them.

There is self defense, and there is killing.

It should be an unwritten rule that all OP's in the OT have at least one element of Dakka bingo right from the get go. We got off to a late start in this thread... the cards don't fill themselves people!

For what it's actually worth Zultan, I wasn't actually referencing your post. I was more thinking about what Smacks said with regard to his German Friends opinions of Turkish Immigrants.

If Dakka OT has taught me anything it's that, as a white male, I am full of guilt and surrounded by privilege.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
It's a good thing we're profiling people by stereotypes now. A faster and more effective way to blame the victim!

In saying that, it is odd that he's walking around the garage with a flashlight, it certainly appears as if he was intending to take something. Although what bearing him being a Turkish German has I don't understand.

It has no bearing at all, I simply called him a Turk because he is, but he's also a German, it's just semantics. But immediately the race card came out and suddenly anybody who doesn't believe he's innocent is a racist victim blamer. So the take home message here is that white guilt liberals never fail to entertain, and will always make race an issue when possible.

Dede is a victim and a probable criminal. Blaming him for being a criminal is not the same as blaming him for being a victim.

He was born in Germany, he's German. He is of Turkish descent but that's not the same as being Turkish, in fact it's the same as an American who had ancestors 100 years ago in Ireland saying that they're of Irish descent. That doesn't make the American Irish and it doesn't make him any more Turkish than German. By referring to him as a Turk rather than a German you are bringing race into it.

Many such Americans would claim that this does make them Irish, but Americans are a little overzealous when it comes to alleged heritage.

And I called him a Turk, so what. He is. You do realize that not all Turkic peoples are Turkish, right? And what does it matter whether you call him by race or nationality? These are adjectives. And actually I do feel that race is a factor here, although not for the reasons you are supposing. I'd bet that nobody would even know about this story if it wasn't about an innocent, oppressed non-white who could do no wrong. Even though they call him German in these articles, it's pretty easy to see the race baiting in this case al a Trayvon Marton.

 ZultanQ wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
It's a good thing we're profiling people by stereotypes now. A faster and more effective way to blame the victim!

In saying that, it is odd that he's walking around the garage with a flashlight, it certainly appears as if he was intending to take something. Although what bearing him being a Turkish German has I don't understand.

It has no bearing at all, I simply called him a Turk because he is, but he's also a German, it's just semantics. But immediately the race card came out and suddenly anybody who doesn't believe he's innocent is a racist victim blamer. So the take home message here is that white guilt liberals never fail to entertain, and will always make race an issue when possible.

Dede is a victim and a probable criminal. Blaming him for being a criminal is not the same as blaming him for being a victim.

He was born in Germany, he's German. He is of Turkish descent but that's not the same as being Turkish, in fact it's the same as an American who had ancestors 100 years ago in Ireland saying that they're of Irish descent. That doesn't make the American Irish and it doesn't make him any more Turkish than German. By referring to him as a Turk rather than a German you are bringing race into it.

Many such Americans would claim that this does make them Irish, but Americans are a little overzealous when it comes to alleged heritage.

And I called him a Turk, so what. He is. You do realize that not all Turkic peoples are Turkish, right? And what does it matter whether you call him by race or nationality? These are adjectives. And actually I do feel that race is a factor here, although not for the reasons you are supposing. I'd bet that nobody would even know about this story if it wasn't about an innocent, oppressed non-white who could do no wrong. Even though they call him German in these articles, it's pretty easy to see the race baiting in this case al a Trayvon Marton.

So the other story where the guy shot two white kids and got convicted which was covered by the news never happened?

You seem to have a pretty big chip on your shoulder.

The reason this story is being published is because the accused have admitted to wanting to lure people in to their home by way of setting a trap. While the trap was designed to ensnare a thief, and it certainly appears from the use of his flashight that the boy was perhaps snooping rather than helping, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that the accused is lying further about the circumstances of the victim being in the garage. He's already lied about other aspects of the case.

The kid may very well have been snooping around and looking to steel. I'm perfectly fine with the story having two bad guys in it, but they don't cancel each other out.

 d-usa wrote:

So the other story where the guy shot two white kids and got convicted which was covered by the news never happened?

For every article where there is a white victim, there are tons of other articles about whites hurting non-whites. Does that means that whites commit more crimes against non-whites? No, since statistically black on black crime specifically happens in much higher rates than white on black crime. But it doesn't get reported in big controversial news stories like this. Blacks killing each other can't help it because they are underprivileged, but when whites kill blacks they do it because they are malicious racists. There can be no other reason.

 ZultanQ wrote:


Many such Americans would claim that this does make them Irish, but Americans are a little overzealous when it comes to alleged heritage.

And I called him a Turk, so what. He is. You do realize that not all Turkic peoples are Turkish, right? And what does it matter whether you call him by race or nationality? These are adjectives. And actually I do feel that race is a factor here, although not for the reasons you are supposing. I'd bet that nobody would even know about this story if it wasn't about an innocent, oppressed non-white who could do no wrong. Even though they call him German in these articles, it's pretty easy to see the race baiting in this case al a Trayvon Marton.

wow , I'm not sure, but i think you invented a new thing to go along with white-guilt, it's called white-paranoia.

I'm an advocate for being able to defend your home and your life, but I still don't think that it was necessary for the homeowner to kill him whether or not the person had bad intent.

He was in a position to prevent escape, armed, and had the element of surprise. The homeowner could have at least tried (Although I do understand that he has absolutely no obligation to by law) to hold the person at gunpoint while waiting for police to arrive. I simply believe that in this case the person did not need to die, and that the homeowner did intend on killing someone that night.

 d-usa wrote:
The kid may very well have been snooping around and looking to steel. I'm perfectly fine with the story having two bad guys in it, but they don't cancel each other out.

Definitely not, although I think we'll find out more that perhaps suggests the accused has been lying about 1 or 2 other details. Also the "chip" comment wasn't directed at yourself just in case you thought as much.

I know it wasn't me, no worries.