State v. Wanrow

On the afternoon of August 11, 1972, defendant’s two children were staying at the home of Ms. Hooper, a friend of defendant. Defendant’s son was playing in the neighborhood and came back to Ms. Hooper’s house and told her that a man tried to pull him off his bicycle and drag him into a house. Some months earlier, Ms. Hooper’s 7-year-old daughter had developed a rash on her body which was diagnosed as venereal disease. Ms. Hooper had been unable to persuade her daughter to tell her who had molested her.

A few minutes after the defendant’s son related his story to Ms. Hooper about the man who tried to detain him, Mr. Wesler appeared on the porch of the Hooper house and stated through the door, “I didn’t touch the kid, I didn’t touch the kid.” At that moment, the Hooper girl, seeing Wesler at the door, indicated to her mother that Wesler was the man who had molested her. Ms. Hooper called the police, but the police told her they could not arrest him until Monday morning.

Ms. Hooper told the defendant about what happened. The defendant arrived at Ms. Hooper’s house with a pistol in her handbag. The two women decided that they were too afraid to stay alone and decided to call the defendant’s sister and brother in law to sleep over. There were eight young children in the house and four adults. At around 5am, the brother in law went to the Wesler residence and accused him of molesting children. Mr. Wesler suggested that they go to the Hooper residence and get the whole situation straightened out. They went back to the Hooper house together, and Mr. Wesler went inside while the brother in law stayed outside.

Once Wesler entered the house, a good deal of shouting took place. This woke up one of the children and Mr. Wesler approached the child and said: “My what a cute little boy.” The defendant shot Wesler. Ms. Hooper called the police and told them that a guy broke in and her friend shot him.

At trial, the jury was instructed that in evaluating the gravity of the danger to the respondent to determine if she acted in self-defense, they should consider only those acts and circumstances occurring “at or immediately before the killing.” She was convicted of first degree assault and second degree murder. She appealed to the Court of Appeals, who reversed the case. The government appealed.