FL - Sara Morales, 35, shot dead by motorcyclist she hit with car, Orange City, 20 Nov 2021

New Posts

Cryptic said:
Though this article is dated, it mentions that the local Sheriff is working with State Attorney's Office.

Though these guys and girls are prosecutorial legal heavy weights, their investigations can take a long time. Another good thing is that as they are state level, they are not intimidated by local sentiments regarding a case.

For example, this off duty police officer was not indicted by the local grand jury (swore that he absolutely had no other choice but to near empty a magazine after he was violently shoved to the ground by an autistic adult.

The local District Attorney seemed hesitant to purse the matter after the grand jury rejected the charges. State level prosecutors then filed charges- about eight months later.

Ex-LAPD officer charged with voluntary manslaughter in Corona Costco shooting – Press Enterprise
Click to expand...
State attorneys are regional in FL. The 7th district covers Volusia county, the office of the SA is in Deland. So is the Sheriff's office.

Offices

Don't compare FL to CA, we do things a lot different than CA.
 
Ozoner said:
She should have fired her weapon immediately.

I don't own a gun, but a CPL holder once told me, "Don't pull a gun unless you're going to use it," and I consider that very good advice.
Click to expand...
100% agree. She would have immediately been found to be within her Stand Your Ground rights, IMO.
 
She was pregnant. She was already safely behind presumably locked doors. She was on the phone with 911. The men weren't trying to get in by any report. Why did she go out? With a gun. Can anyone give me a logical answer? I'm not understanding putting her unborn baby at risk especially if she was afraid and outnumbered when all she had to do was stay inside and wait for LE. I want to understand but it doesn't make any kind of sense.
 
Catmommy said:
She was pregnant. She was already safely behind presumably locked doors. She was on the phone with 911. The men weren't trying to get in by any report. Why did she go out? With a gun. Can anyone give me a logical answer? I'm not understanding putting her unborn baby at risk especially if she was afraid and outnumbered when all she had to do was stay inside and wait for LE. I want to understand but it doesn't make any kind of sense.
Click to expand...
The better question is, why did these men chase her and then stand outside her property? ANSWER ME THAT, PLEASE. We can't ask SM because she is DEAD. So I can't answer your question. But the mother said SM was scared to death. Maybe she thought they would come up to the house and her 11 year old was there too. Who knows but Derr had already shown aggressiveness toward her out on the road and then 3 men chased her home. (2 motorcycles and 1 truck). The 3 exhibited reckless behavoir by following her home! Do you recall the Aubrey case? The only thing SM doesn't have is Ben Crump and Al Sharpton.
 
Razz said:
The better question is, why did these men chase her and then stand outside her property? ANSWER ME THAT, PLEASE. We can't ask SM because she is DEAD. So I can't answer your question. But the mother said SM was scared to death. Maybe she thought they would come up to the house and her 11 year old was there too. Who knows but Derr had already shown aggressiveness toward her out on the road and then 3 men chased her home. (2 motorcycles and 1 truck). The 3 exhibited reckless behavoir by following her home! Do you recall the Aubrey case? The only thing SM doesn't have is Ben Crump and Al Sharpton.
Click to expand...
This is quite different than the Arbery case, IMO. Let's see what the sheriff comes up with.
 
It's bonkers to me that FL has very strong Stand Your Ground laws, but in this case, where the victim stood her ground and was murdered, they're not quick to charge to charge the murderer and they seem to blame the victim. It's like having it both ways. Either people are allowed to stand their ground (without being executed) or not. You can't just say Stand Your Ground exists but whoever shoots first gets out. It's not the wild, wild west. Make a choice, FL.

If SM had fired, she'd likely be cleared due to Stand Your Ground and Derr would be considered guilty for following her home resulting in his own death. Her crime here was not killing someone?
 
Catmommy said:
She was pregnant. She was already safely behind presumably locked doors. She was on the phone with 911. The men weren't trying to get in by any report. Why did she go out? With a gun. Can anyone give me a logical answer? I'm not understanding putting her unborn baby at risk especially if she was afraid and outnumbered when all she had to do was stay inside and wait for LE. I want to understand but it doesn't make any kind of sense.
Click to expand...

She was probably panicked and didn’t know what to do. Perhaps she thought that since the 3 men had followed her home, their next step would be forcible entry. With 20/20 hindsight, we can say that she shouldn’t have grabbed a gun that she didn’t know how to operate, and gone outside with it. She may have felt that that the sight of it would inhibit a home invasion. Tactically, that was a mistake in this situation, but that too is 20/20 hindsight. Her best strategy would have been to stay in the house. With or without a firearm, she might have been able to plan a defensive position.

We can also say, with 20/20 hindsight, that she should have taken a class that dealt with firearms instruction and some basics of tactical defense. Keeping the firearm concealed, but ready to shoot, would have been a suitable choice for someone with some training. The need to shoot would have been determined by the actions of the 3 men, and how threatening they became. She didn’t even know how to operate the pistol’s slide, so that kind of preparation was out of the question. Her best option was remaining indoors behind some kind of cover, like a wall or large piece of furniture, and waiting for LE to arrive.

But it’s all hindsight. I think she was frightened and in a panic, and wasn’t thinking clearly. IMO, a lot of people would panic if they were chased home by 3 hostile individuals.
 
wary said:
I’m not going to criticize anyone for chasing a hit-and-run car.
Click to expand...

As soon as the license plate number was relayed to law enforcement, the chase is composed of one crime victim and three vigilantes.

Three vigilantes who could have waited on the sidewalk/curb/edge of public property until LE arrived.

OR empty an entire magazine into a human, if you are a vigilante.

jmho ymmv lrr
 
Last edited:
wary said:
I’m not going to criticize anyone for chasing a hit-and-run car.
Click to expand...

That's vigilantism and it really shouldn't be tolerated because it puts everyone else on the road (and frankly in the community) at risk. So if something bad happens as the result of someone taking the law into their own hands by chasing a hit and run (instead of just reporting the license plate which he already had), then my opinion is that person is just as responsible for whatever bad event happened.
 
BeginnerSleuther said:
That's vigilantism and it really shouldn't be tolerated because it puts everyone else on the road (and frankly in the community) at risk. So if something bad happens as the result of someone taking the law into their own hands by chasing a hit and run (instead of just reporting the license plate which he already had), then my opinion is that person is just as responsible for whatever bad event happened.
Click to expand...
If she really did swerve into his motorcycle, in an attempt to knock him off his bike, then she was the one who escalated things. I can understand why he would want to follow her and have police come and investigate her actions.

She was inside her home, with 2 weapons, and the police on the phone with her. There was no need for her to go outside and confront them. They were on the sidewalk, not trying to enter her home. JMO
 
BeginnerSleuther said:
That's vigilantism and it really shouldn't be tolerated because it puts everyone else on the road (and frankly in the community) at risk. So if something bad happens as the result of someone taking the law into their own hands by chasing a hit and run (instead of just reporting the license plate which he already had), then my opinion is that person is just as responsible for whatever bad event happened.
Click to expand...
True. The only time I would chase another car would be if I witnessed an abduction—in which case waiting for law enforcement might have tragic consequences.
 
katydid23 said:
If she really did swerve into his motorcycle, in an attempt to knock him off his bike, then she was the one who escalated things. I can understand why he would want to follow her and have police come and investigate her actions.

She was inside her home, with 2 weapons, and the police on the phone with her. There was no need for her to go outside and confront them. They were on the sidewalk, not trying to enter her home. JMO
Click to expand...

Disagree. He was the one who was aggressive first and we have no idea if she swerved to harm him or swerved to get away from him. He was harassing her, according to witnesses. Had he been going the speed limit, the two would have never even interacted. The entire interaction was his fault, IMO.

Per FL's Stand Your Ground law, he was in the wrong, not her. She isn't alive to tell us why she came out, but I think most women can probably relate to the fear she likely felt at having been chased home by three men. She is not required to retreat. She is allowed to fight back once she gets home. The narrative that she shouldn't have come out of the house is victim blaming and neglects the fact that HE shouldn't have chased her home and definitely shouldn't have shot her 5 times. You need to get away? Jump in your car or shoot once if you really feel your life is in danger. Shooting 5 times, combined with everything else, I can't believe he hasn't been charged with murder yet.

MOO.
 
BeginnerSleuther said:
Disagree. He was the one who was aggressive first and we have no idea if she swerved to harm him or swerved to get away from him. He was harassing her, according to witnesses. Had he been going the speed limit, the two would have never even interacted. The entire interaction was his fault, IMO.

Per FL's Stand Your Ground law, he was in the wrong, not her. She isn't alive to tell us why she came out, but I think most women can probably relate to the fear she likely felt at having been chased home by three men. She is not required to retreat. She is allowed to fight back once she gets home. The narrative that she shouldn't have come out of the house is victim blaming and neglects the fact that HE shouldn't have chased her home and definitely shouldn't have shot her 5 times. You need to get away? Jump in your car or shoot once if you really feel your life is in danger. Shooting 5 times, combined with everything else, I can't believe he hasn't been charged with murder yet.

MOO.
Click to expand...
He has already tried to distort the narrative by claiming that she was pointing a gun at him while the other men stated that she was simply waiving it around.

I think that Derr will eventually be charged with murder. Prosecutors will probably try to reach a plea agreement, though, because the circumstances make this one something less than a slam dunk.
 
BeginnerSleuther said:
Disagree. He was the one who was aggressive first and we have no idea if she swerved to harm him or swerved to get away from him.
Click to expand...

How do you get away from someone by swerving into them with your car? Isn't that the same thing as attempted murder, if you try to run into a motorcyclist with your car? That is a very aggressive move on her part.

He was reportedly yelling at her and pointing at her---but she was in her vehicle and he was on a cycle. He was not in a position to harm her in any way. Running her vehicle into him, almost knocking him over, is a very irresponsible act and I see no excuse for that, imo.


He was harassing her, according to witnesses. Had he been going the speed limit, the two would have never even interacted. The entire interaction was his fault, IMO.
Click to expand...

So he was speeding? Not that unusual for a motorcycle to go speeding past a vehicle. Poor driving skills on her part, to pull in front of a cycle speeding past in the next lane though. They were both at fault, imo.

Per FL's Stand Your Ground law, he was in the wrong, not her. She isn't alive to tell us why she came out, but I think most women can probably relate to the fear she likely felt at having been chased home by three men. She is not required to retreat. She is allowed to fight back once she gets home.
Click to expand...

She had already retreated by going inside and locking her doors. That was the best decision and she should have kept it that way. 'Fighting' back against what? The 3 witnesses were outside on the public sidewalk, speaking to the police. There was nothing to 'fight' about at that point. Why not wait for police to come and sort things out? She was the one that turned it into a fight by escalating it so suddenly.


The narrative that she shouldn't have come out of the house is victim blaming and neglects the fact that HE shouldn't have chased her home and definitely shouldn't have shot her 5 times. You need to get away? Jump in your car or shoot once if you really feel your life is in danger. Shooting 5 times, combined with everything else, I can't believe he hasn't been charged with murder yet.
MOO.
Click to expand...

How is it 'victim blaming'? She was the one who introduced GUNS into the situation. She was the one that created the gun fight. There was no reason to do so. She deserves the criticism. It is not 'victim blaming' to criticise someone for greatly escalating a situation that was under control into a gun fight.

I disagree that he shouldn't have followed her when she left the scene. He and two witnesses seemed to think she tried to knock him off his bike with a moving vehicle. I can't blame him for being upset.

I don't think he should have shot her. That was a very bad decision and he probably should be investigated for manslaughter. But she deserves much of the responsibility for her very poor decisions that day as well.

She had no excuse for swerving her vehicle purposely into his motorcycle---she could have killed him or another motorist by doing so.

And there was no reason for her to come out of her locked home, waving her gun and screaming, because the 3 men were not trying to get into her home and were speaking to police and awaiting their arrival.

I don't understand why people are acting as though she was the total victim here. She escalated things so insanely, at least twice. None of this had to happen so tragically. JMO
 
Last edited:
katydid23 said:
So he was speeding? Not that unusual for a motorcycle to go speeding past a vehicle. Poor driving skills on her part, to pull in front of a cycle speeding past in the next lane though. They were both at fault, imo.
Click to expand...
If the motorcycle was exceeding the legal speed, then the driver of that motorcycle is the criminal, not someone who made a legal lane change (assuming she used her blinker).

I don't know how fast he was going, but I often see motorcycle riders zipping by on "crotch rockets" doing what must be in excess of 100 m.p.h.

If he was driving that fast, then maybe she changed lanes in front of him in order to teach him a lesson or force him to slow down.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 172 more.
Total: 3,729 (members: 173, guests: 3,556)

Online statistics

Members online
173
Guests online
3,556
Total visitors
3,729
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,269
Messages
17,966,470
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top