👮♂️Should Kevin go to jail? 🚀Get the CURIOSITYSTREAM/NEBULA BUNDLE curiositystream.com/legaleagle It’s the only way to get the BLOOPER REEL! FYI, I got "Kids Die Hard" from my friend Patrick Willems. Check out his video on why Home Alone is Great: ruclips.net/video/O7XlmP1aa-w/видео.html
LegalEagle : If Kevin were to be accused of attempted murder (assuming his homemade traps are found to be unnecessarily deadly force outside of a stand your ground state) would this qualify as premeditated 1st degree because he neglected to notify the police and planned specific deadly injuries to specific intruders ahead of time? (i.e deadly force traps such as the paint cans, hot iron, cut rope, blow torch and even the hidden foot spike)
Can we also talk about the fact that when a mother calls and says her child is home alone, and the police went to check on the house, and get no response, shouldn't that be an indication that there's a problem, not that everything is fine??
On top of this, the child abandonment charge on the parents would likely never stick for this reason. I doubt that Kevin was alone for 24-hours before the police were notified and they dropped the ball on the welfare check.
@@cameron4997 Contacting the police was certainly the right move on their part and considering most of the neighbors were gone as well as everyone in the family being on the trip, they weren't left many other options than the police. I'd assume the police would at least leave someone to monitor the home for the kid or check back in several times since a missing child is kind of a big deal. When the police failed to carry out their part, the parents would likely just get it noted on their record and told not to let it happen again. Once it does kind of happen again for the sequel, they might get in a little more trouble though.
Technically the zipline that leads from the house window outside actually leads to a tree house in the Kevin's backyard, which is still on the property of which Kevin's family owns and therefore the castle law permitting the use of deadly force is still technically in effect. Kevin may have left the home but he is still on what is legally considered to be his property.
@@joshuanash6401 Except in the case of an out house or other such building that can be reasonably be considered as a dwelling. A dwelling being any structure that can provide shelter from the elements. There also comes the issue that they were still pursuing him, him, not property or goods, him. That gives him self defense rights that are not exclusive to the property. For example if I went out on the street and someone chases me, If I have a gun and they refuse to stop pursuing me I can legally use deadly force. The same concept applies here.
@@csmith9573 Illinois justifiable force provisions can be found in 720 ILCS 5/7. In Illinois, you may use justifiable force: To defend yourself or another person; To protect your dwelling; or To protect your property. That is castle doctrine
Luke Woodside its important to note the distinction that in many jurisdictions you have a “duty to retreat” before resorting to lethal force% meaning you must have exhausted all your options for evading direct confrontation before turning to meet your assailant. Furthermore self defense means you can use lesser or equal force to meet the threat. If a man us chasing you saying hes gonna beat your ass you cant turn around and shoot him unless he presents a weapon. States that do not have this stated in their laws make up the controversial “stand your ground” jurisdictions meaning any perceived threat can be met with lethal force (ie florida) regardless if the assailant is armed, on your property, or even started the confrontation.
"we know that you're in there, and that you're all alone" A reasonable jury could agree that the child may feel immediately threatened by two adults seeking violent entry into a home in which they are alone, and excessive use of force may be the child's only means of survival. Thus, all actions taken by the 8-year old could be cleared in self-defense argument.
@@Aqueox Exactly, it's very hard to argue that Kevin went too far when the bandits still caught him. Clearly this movie takes place in an alternate reality where people are much more resistant to physical injury, and Kevin's traps should be seen as less dangerous than they would be in the real world.
@@AqueoxYes, the robbers repeated and alarmingly reckless attacks on the home and safety of this child clearly show that they are an unreasonable force that can't be stopped with even extreme uses of force. They repeatedly recieved injuries that could've been fatal to a normal man and continue their invasion despite it all. It's clear that the only thing that would've stopped these men is death or incapacitation.
@@Daybreak81523Exactly, the law says a lot about how one can use deadly force only if they reason this or that... This child can't be expect to have an adults reasoning no matter how intelligent or skilled they are as an inventor. skill or intelligence is not equivalent to a matured mental state.
There has always been the argument that he didn’t call the police since he is first introduced to Harry as a police officer and could think he is a real officer and others could be just as bad. Also the police in this movie are comically inept and portrayed as the worst service imaginable. I mean, the family called and reported a stranded child and they showed almost 0 interest.
Also i don't know why people forget this, but he thinks he MADE HIS FAMILY DISAPPEAR. So he doesn't want cops showing up and taking him away because he's a kid all by himself who was also shoplifting earlier
He didn't call the police because the phone lines were down from the storm. This is why his parents couldn't call him from France. The guy repairing the telephone pole as they're leaving the house for the airport shouts that it's going to take the phone company multiple days to restore service.
@@FireMarshallStev true. I forgot about that but, since Kevin wasn't out there when the family left, he may not have known the lines were down, especially since we don't see him call the police until the end, maybe from the neighbors house.
@@mr.midgardville If Kevin couldn't eat anything else besides that pizza, then he could fear starving to death. His brother tried to slowly murder his brother!
His parents did contact the police when they realized he was missing. The police office checked the house but since Kevin was scared he never answered the door. Police office incorrectly concluded he wasn't home. If the police officer did find him. Tempory arrangements could have been made so that he was supervised until awaiting his parents return. The police bares some responsibility in his failings.
The police officer that checked the house should be in trouble because he knew that there was supposed to be a young child alone in the house and when nobody responded when he knocked he just left. What if something had happened to Kevin and he had been incapable of responding to the officer and due to that died? What kind of idiot just knocks on the door of a house that a little kid is likely to have been alone in for a decent amount of time and just leaves when nothing responds?
@@jedodom3056 To be fair, he shouldn't be in any sort of trouble. As evidenced on this channel the police can legally bomb your house to rubble and provide no recompense, so something this relatively minute would make no sense for them to bear responsibility for.
In his defense: He had reason to assume that Buzz was no more. I guess US has some sort of laws about embezzling estate though, and maybe there are taxes to be paid too, but I'd guess Kevin could have just considered those to be his inheritance. Can't assume 8 year old to know how long it takes to pronounce missing person as dead :D
But Harry and Marv were trying to kill him the whole time he was in New York! Plus, he tried asking for help from the hotel staff but the staff was too worried about the credit card theft to help him.
Objection: as a minor, Kevin should not be expected to accurately judge how much force is considered "reasonable" or distinguish deadly from non-deadly force.
@@mikedalby2978 These burglars were making every continues effort to enter the property despite knowing that a minor was in there home alone. In my book this is a clear "kid get a real shut gun and aim for the face"
There's actually a REAL kids' "Die Hard." It's called "Playing Dangerous." A Kevin McAllister knockoff actually fights terrorists. It was shot as a "hard-R" movie but edited down to PG-13.
To that first point, I could say that they truly believed he was with them (or at least were unaware of him being missing) until they realized at which point they made every effort to get back as soon as possible and care for him until they could get back
No watching this is watching somebody over explain how to put cheese on a pizza Goes into every single detail and they ramble on about 1 detail for hours
he also has the ability to retreat from the yard and call the police from the safety of his home which probably a jury would find, the problem is not that the yard is the property the problem is he left the safety of his home to engage aggressively
The real crimes are in the second movie where he goes out of his way to lure Harry and Marv into deathtraps in a renovated building. Plus all the identity theft.
@@ryanhoward3383thats more of an understandable thing though. He was recording him while he was in the shower. Assaulting a child is never good but it was probably more to get him out.
Objection: The shoplifting was clearly accidental: frightened by the man in front of him, he turns and runs away, forgetting momentarily about the toothbrush in his hand.
Agreed. All he had to do was drop the toothbrush as he was retreating, or just stop for the officer and hand it back as he explained that the old guy simply scared him.
@@Dark_Mishra While I agree, I must ask this question. Is Kevin, an 8 year old, who is frightened of an adult and then yelled at and pursued by more adults, going to think of returning the toothbrush and calmly explaining? In my opinion, I don't believe that scenario is likely. Most children rarely think of consequences or think that a discussion will get them out of said consequences. Therefore, I submit that Kevin, from his perspective and within his capacity for problem solving, made the best decision he could.
Kevin’s family wasn’t just negligent, they were also emotionally abusive. If you REALLY listen/watch closely, you can see that his own family members just hate him and bully him when he wasn’t intending to be a brat. Especially his mother in the beginning, like damn woman! They write him like he’s supposed to be the brat, but in reality, if you pay close attention, he really doesn’t deserve all the neglect and bullying. It’s gotten so bad that I’d say cps would’ve been called on the parents, especially since NO ONE notices he was missing before they boarded the plane! They’ve definitely committed a crime with child neglect and abuse.
Nope in Illinois there is no charge for emotional abusive parenting mainly because there’s a grey point in between emotional abuse and correction so there is however a physical abuse charge but that doesn’t apply here
Objection: Given his age he was significantly less physically able than the adult burglars, so even after he left the house he still didn't have an ability to safely retreat. Especially given the malice they've shown toward him personally.
They were also currently in pursuit of him in an attempt to cause serious bodily harm if not murder him, so him cutting them down actually goes along with him using possible deadly force to defend himself.
Also, don't call Buzz's actions "Harmless taunting." The amount of bullying that Kevin receives from his siblings and family is a psychological nightmare. In fact, Kevin's behaviors could have been 100% attributed to his home life. I'd say the McCallisters are in need of some counseling.
In the scene where Kevin nearly gets flattened by the work van, the scene was actually played in reverse so that Culkin would not actually be in danger of bodily harm. He walked backwards and the van was backed up the driveway during the filming.
Kevin steals a toothbrush: im a criminal Kevin when he attempts to murder 2 guys with a shotgun, a blowtorch, and many various objects: this is fine editing this comment to tell you one thing, i know its a bb gun, i just wanted to make a joke here.
@@LegalEagle Are you dodging the biggest malpractice example in living history on purpose? Or are you dodging it because of your own dishonest politcal reasons displayed in past videos? The IG report just uncovered an FBI lawyer manufacturing evidence to obtain and continue a FISA warrant on a member of the Trumps staff. That is a huge deal and here you are making Home Alone critiques.
I mean he's not a lawyer in the case so he has no real obligation to cover it on a youtube video at any haste. He possibly could be doing the video right now but those take time. Especially if you are researching the law to cover it. The very fact that he even brought light to the fact that Trump is possibly guilty of anything kinda sticks him closer to the liberal side if any. If that's what you trying to imply. Lawyers in general tend to be centralists if anything. They make enough money to be happy and most already do what they want to do, so they don't usually support republican beliefs. Some do, but probably not the majority. Especially since most Lawyers know the law. This gives them a headstart into knowing why the system is built the way it is. Therefore the only time I ever hear of Lawyers committing things like tax fraud are when they are tied to people who also commit it openly. Just an example but I can probably go down a whole list of things Republicans openly break the law on. Liberals these days seem to basically attack anyone who is even remotely neutral. Even other Liberals. When a Liberal makes me look like an alt right then that is probably time to real yourself out of your closeminded little crevice under that rock you living in.
Objection: Doesn't the treehouse on the property's lawn still count as "home" and still be under a "castle law" therefore letting kevin use deadly force to defend his dwelling "the treehouse"?
I'd add they were still in active pursuit of him, likely with intent to harm, by climbing along the rope to the tree house he just ran to. And I think the treehouse may still count because stuff like a covered front porch does or an attached garage. Until he cut the line I'd say it was an attached tree house, lol.
Plus, they were about 2 floors up, which would put their feet somewhere between 10 and 20 feet above the ground. They would have to land directly on top of their heads to cause any real injury, let alone death
I was told to change my name So here I have a feeling the guy who commented is from Europe, most jurisdictions over here treat fleeing the cops as a passive resistance, whereas what you think as resisting arrest would be called active resistance
12:35 What, no mention of Marv screaming, "I'm gonna KILL this kid!" upon entering through the window? That sounds like cause to fear for one's life to me.
You forgot Kevin's animal endangermant, when he sets Buzz's tarantula loose in the house, and then later sets the spider on the face of one of the Wet Bandits.
Remember that the "reasonably" thing changes since he's a child. A jury could reasonably assume that Kevin didn't think cutting them down on that zipline would do much more than just delay them from catching him. Which was, of course, his intention. So in other words, his wealthy father's lawyer could probably defend Kevin well enough that attempted homicide never sees the light of day. And of course as you mentioned he's a child. He's not likely to get any significant sort of legal discipline even if he were found guilty.
Plus their brain isn’t developed well, so they don’t have the same logic. Almost all of the charges against Kevin would’ve been dropped or lowered because it is reasonable to assume he was perceived things worse than they actually were.
@@pineforest1442 Naaah, that's just an excuse to take consequences off of someone. Throw the book at Kevin so it's made clear what justice actually looks like
He's 8 years old, in Illinois. Children under the age of 13 can't be incriminated. There will always be exceptions to this, like classmates planning and murdering another classmate, but Kevin 99% would not be an exception.
11:03 To be fair, I think the main reason why he doesn't call the police is because he knows that Marv (I think it was Marv) was dressed up as an officer, and he might still think that he is an officer. And if he's an officer, calling the police, who might also be criminals, would create more problems then it helps solve.
@@nicholaschisholm7018 no, the power was just down to the phone lines, but the repair men fixed it, it had nothing to do with Harry and Marv, it was just the power outage
Objection - When Kevin cuts the line on the Wet bandits it is after the intimidation and threat of bodily harm, they are in close pursuit and as such add immediate mitigating circumstances of fear for ones life
And even the duty to retreat can be easily argued against, especially since they still manage to catch up to him after all of his attempts, which include the use of potentially deadly force, that alone would indicate that he had tried all other options, after which he was only saved by the intervention of a local public servant. (note, I call him a public servant due to the fact that we see him salting the sidewalk, which I believe is the duty of the city, and thus him having that as his job makes him a public servant, as he is employed by the local government, could be wrong)
And Kevin did try non-dangerous methods of scaring the bandits off; the mannequin dance party and the mobster movie with added sound effects. After both of those tricks failed, it was reasonable for Kevin to assume that Harry and Marv were determined to kill him and violent defense was necessary.
_"Everything is illegal"_ [Legal Eagle] _"There is no such thing as innocence. Only degrees of guilt!"_ [Lord Inquisitor Karamazov] hmm.. seems to be an attitude that comes with the job
I mean haven't you seen the books with laws in them? My lawyer has a wall that measures ~20' long, and 6' high dedicated to nothing but books with laws in them. He even jokes about how he has to replace them all the time, because the government changes the laws every year.
Well, as a ruler of a country, you would need to prevent any possible loopholes in laws that can cause a criminal to go free, the preventing of loopholes is actually what makes everything illegal. Let alone that you would prefer to have citizens unable to overthrow you, so the only person who really is free to do most things without any legal reprocussions, is the ruler of the country. The Queen of England is technically the most powerful person alive because of that. She can literally have someone arrested in some countries because she doesnt like their face and have them executed. Ofcourse she doesnt do that, and there would be objections to it in practise, but legally speaking, she can kill about 1/6th of the human population without any punishment.(technically 100% of humanity if you include tourists)
Objection: you stated that Kevin retreated when he left the house so it would be battery or attempted murder to cut the rope from the house to the tree house. However because the tree house was still on the property and Kevin was essentially trapped in the tree house on his own property with two criminals attempting to reach him with the intent to harm him. This would still be self defense.
In Illinois, anyone under the age of 13, the criminally insane, and those who are involuntarily intoxicated or drugged cannot be found guilty of a crime. I was quite surprised by this, because in the UK, the age of criminal responsibility is 10.
It's the same in Australia, however it's more of "you can be tried as an adult from this age" rather than a blanket application thereof. So, if the system says "yeah you should know not to do this by 10" then you MAY be tried as an adult but it's probably not going to happen
@@agent_sus3273 I got charged for assault at 10, it made me not lash out at people ever again without good reason. Then I was later told my record got cleared when I was 17, it gets wiped at 16. I’d say the police getting involved when I was 10 was a good idea.
Phones were repaired after the parents had stopped trying to contact the house and started trying to get home. The criminally lax police force never called the McCalesters back to inform them they were unable to contact the child because they are supremely incompetent, so Kevin's family was unaware that they needed to keep trying to contact him and instead focused on returning home, the phone he called the cops on was in his home just up the stairs from where he spidered Harry and Marv.
@@madestmadhatter the phones weren't repaired. the long distance lines were down while the local lines at the time were still active it's understandable for a kid in such a situation to be wary of calling the police anyway given that they were already shown they're willing to impersonate the police and kids weren't/aren't taken seriously if the uniform looks legitimate harry and marv very well could've said they were patroling the neighborhood because of the bandits and likely not been questioned about it moreover, when then cops were called first they were dismissive, and the moment they got no response about a missing child left...a child calling and saying they need help at X location would've likely been met with the same stupid response (1 cop coming out, who knocks at the door of a frightened individual and then just..walks away) and that's something that's ACTUALLY happened, women called the cops about an individual that broke into their home the dispatcher told the caller to stay quiet and they'll dispatch the cop knocked and then left (with no further investigation, including not checking the rear of the house that was reported to have been broken into) the women were raped by said intruder the courts found that the cops did nothing wrong even back then it was well known police have no duty to do shit. even when the courts issue restraining and protection orders whether or not they do anything is up to them and if they decide not to they're legally protected don't gotta protect or react to people who call the police don't gotta react to mass shootings don't gotta enforce court protection/restraining orders honestly our police force has no reason to exist, they've no legal obligation to do their job even when not doing it results in deaths
@@sammykent5752 "protect" not respond. DeShaney vs. Winnebago Town of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales Warren v. District of Columbia the parkland shooting lawsuit that was thrown out because the officers had no duty to protect as students aren't considered "in custody" yeah...it's not nonsense, the police have no legal obligation to protect you from anything, even if they swore their protection or were ordered to do so by a judge
Felony child abandonment requires intent, the McAlisters were reckless, but they did not intentionally abandon Kevin. Perhaps there is a negligence charge which is more appropriate.
Is it just me that feels their entire body clamp up when Marv stands on that nail? Can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen that movie, but it gets me every, single, time.
@@wafflecult27 Same here. It wasn't fun either time. First time I was 4 years old. The second time I was 12. I remember crying hard both times. I cringe and feel physical pain in the two spots that I stepped on the nails at.
Fallout Plays oh my God I cannot believe his channel has less than 1M subs. The production value and content quality here is just amazing. I’m not even a lawyer and these videos entertain me like no other. He’ll certainly be huge someday.
Objection: 10:52 "Reasonable Belief of harm" He's a minor faced with two adults attempting to burglarize his home. I would say that short of killing them, any force used could be construed as reasonable. He's compensating for his lack of size and strength with traps and other such "force multipliers".
I remember when, in grade 6, my teacher made us do a group project where we had to rewrite Home Alone for another holiday. We had to do Easter. It was actually really good.
@@SykoMuffin That would be a pretty dark holiday movie. I remember the one guy in the first season of OZ getting crucified on the prisons gym floor by JK Simmons.
AND on top of that it probably wouldn't pan out well because the police wouldn't come instantly, so he would still be in danger while waiting for them.
@@lollikabosso.w.n7153 he couldn’t because the phones weren’t working. However he could have tried to go to a neighbor’s house, but so many of them were traveling that there would be no guarantee that any house he went to would have anyone in it
Even though he “assaulted” Buzz and stole from Buzz, do those actions really need to be prosecuted because those small actions happen inside of the family and should be dealt with by the parents, not the police.
Also Buzz is a huge jerk and I would've punched him too. The theft can be written off as he thought Buzz had completely dissapeared by that point in the movie and therefore he believed the property no longer belonged to Buzz in the eyes of the law
A MASSIVE area where the rest of the family got off easy is the fact that the child was not only old enough but was also capable of taking care of themselves. If the child was the opposite the entire rest of the family would have been in a SHITSTORM of legal trouble.
@@alexthai5223 technically speaking he was putting deterrents due to hostiles planned assault on a known occupied property. If a group of hostile people lets say a militia was known to be coming to your house to assault while knowing you are home, then do you find it should be illegal to set up defenses to slow down the stronger and more deadly forces. The other question is did he know they were just there to steal or did he believe they were after his well-being which they actually were by the end of the film. Note: I feel the area would do well to have more call 911 publicity, since it seems that they have not done a good job spreading trust to locals. Although there is the point that Alan probably would not want a policeman to come to the house while the house is booby trapped, but yes I feel calling the cops would be an important thing for Alan to do instead.
6:25 you can argue that Harry can have that charge dropped because he stated that he told Marv not to clog the sinks, however, he did not make any attempts to stop it besides telling him no, which may make the charge stick
I'm fairly confident old man too slow to react probably told the cashier he'd cover it after Kevin left, explaining the situation and apologizing for the inconvenience anyways.
@@madestmadhatter Even if that was the case, Kevin still resisted arrest by running from the cop. It would probably be shrugged off if it was separate incident, but could be also added to his sentence.
Pretty sure that the situation would be dismissed completely. When the store manager found out the kid was mistakenly left at home, he would have shown up with a box of food and various essentials. And then been promptly killed by death traps.
Yeah, even if a prosecutor managed to get him convicted (IF it goes to trial at all, which is very unlikely), he's just going to get probation for a five year maximum.
Objection: by the time Kevin has retreated to the tree house Harry has made clear he intends to do bodily harm to Kevin through his verbal statements and therefore Kevin is still within his rights to attempt to prevent them pursuing him.
Kevin’s “theft” from Buzz isn’t a case as Kevin is so young, he doesn’t know they forgot him, he thinks he made them disappear with his Christmas wish...therefore it’s not theft, it is “finders keepers” which is totally a legal term 😂
Another thing that supports that Kevin was allowed to use deadly traps is that even after the 2 criminals experienced them multiple times they never gave up.
Its very obvious that some people in this thread dont have siblings Edit: I grew up in an ethnic family of 8 children in a rural town. If you didn't hit back, you were crushed.
I’d actually be curious what the sentence would be after Home Alone 2 because all of the violence happened at Kevin’s uncle’s house, so he wouldn’t be protected by those self-defense laws.
Kevin's attorney could argue that as a guest in his uncle's house, he was covered. He could also argue that he retreated to that location to avoid the escaped felons who were pursuing him out of revenge for the initial incident.
@@joshuanash6401 Not only was he not a guest, Kevin doesn't "retreat" back to his Uncle's home. He actively antagonizes the Wet/Sticky Bandits into chasing him to the home.
Objection the bandits put themselves at risk by entering the home after multiple chances to retreat. Kevin’s parents being negligent could also hold him blameless due to mental health issues from the trauma of waking up 8 years old abandoned and being left alone for approximately 3 days. He did retreat and multiple times the bandits continues persuit. Arguably self defense and no longer defense of the home. the bandits persue off the property after multiple chances they could have retreated themselves. The bandits offered absolutely no reason for him to believe they would stop Thier persuit. Also you didn’t mention the severe property damage from flooding the homes: there was 3 feet of water in the basement. There’s also extreme emotional harm done to a minor. And terrorizing a minor through threats on his person and life And assault on a minor As well as potentially kidnapping considering they hung him off the door and offered no chance for him to leave or run
Dont forget attempted 2nd degree murder once both of them caught up with and captured Kevin. Meaning cutting the rope was a necessity at the moment of cutting it.
I personally don't think Kevin deserves jail, not just because he is a child, but because I have always learned that defending yourself for your safety is always incredibly important.
There's such a thing as proportional response. The burglers had no intent to kill the child until he did horrible things to them. He could genuinely have called the police to arrive just after they did.
Kevin: * breathes * LegalEagle: this violates the Clean Air Act. Kevin will serve fourteen years in state prison and will be on probation for another five years.
Doesn't hold a candle to Home Alone 2, where he's not even defending his home. He lures the Wet Bandits into a Saw style murder warehouse he sets up while on vacation!
GoneZombie doesn’t Kevin also drop a brick from super high up onto a bandit there? You know one of those things that, if they fall onto your head will probably kill you. One of those things so heavy that construction workers need to wear helmets, specifically so one of those doesn’t fall onto them an kill them? That was just straight up attempted murder.
Username445 Kevin McCallister started as a resourceful precocious child who defends his home on Christmas Eve graduating to a murderous, torturous, cold-blooded anti-hero in the sequel. 1.4 Bricks to Marv’s face 2. Marv gets stapled in the ass 3. Marv gets stapled in the balls and face 4. Harry slips off the fire escape landing on his neck 5. Marv falls face-first into the basement 6. Harry gets a case of heavy hand tools dumped on his head 7. Marv slips in the Monster Sap and slides into the shelves of paint, knocking over the whole shelf set on him 8. Marv gets electrocuted by the washtub 9. Harry’s head is set on fire and he attempts to douse it in the toilet filled with gasoline 10. Marv has a heavy bag of flour fall onto his head 11. Harry climbs up a partially disconnected ladder, falling face-first and crushing his fingers 12. Marv and Harry get hit by a sevenweight on the staircase send them flying in the air all the way back to the basement, before Kevin cuts it down and it falls onto their chests. 13. Harry and Marv get crushed up against the wall by a toolchest falling down from the top staircase. 14. Kevin lights the kerosene-soaked rope Harry and Marv are using to climb down from the third story causing them to fall all the way down to the concrete, catapulting wood varnish and/or varnish remover to come raining down upon them both.
@@jamesordwayultralightpilot Because a 8 year old has the initiative to think like that or even understand the concept of Police and that you can do that. I must remind you, the parent should always be accompanying a child for a reason and neither do we give them any ability to make informed choices until at least 16 (again for obvious reasons). I'd accept that in regards to someone mature say a 25 year old did this whole ordeal and who would already have the capacity to make informed decisions and general awareness of the law and consequences. But not someone who hasn't even hit 10. It's considerably lucky for the family's sake that he even did as well as he did without them. Realistic circumstances they probably would hide anyway but can't say that for everyone.
@Emily do you have anything important to add? Or do you just like extrapolating the obvious to make yourself sound smart? I feel like my comment arose something inside of you to try and make a point. A point you failed to make, and you didn't even respond to what I said, so you didn't even make a good reply. I was simply saying that calling 911 does nothing to ensure your safety while your home is being invaded. And that Kevin reacted the only way he could if he wanted to live through this ordeal. 911 is a joke, for anyone who thinks 911 will save you from an assailant, it won't.
Yep. "Duty to flee" only applies if you're not being actively pursued anymore (i.e., you've successfully escaped). If you are still being actively followed with an intent to harm, that still falls under self-defense regardless of where you are.
objection: the only ones who could testify to that are Kevin and the wet bandits. Neither party could reasonably be trusted to give objective testimony.
@@LegalEagle assuming his dad is involved with the mafia, would that mean Kevin's whole family would be arrested since they know where the money comes from?
@@connorhilchie2779 It would depend on his level of involvement and their knowledge. Like if his wife knows he goes around extorting or killing, she could face charges, but it would be hard since she could just say she didn't know and refuse to testify.
As a non-lawyer, I think that kevin could argue that he only modified his house, and that it just so happened that the bandits injured themselves on said modifications.
Yes, & they were still chasing after him, so he is definitely covered legally under the castle law. Lol. If you retreat & they come after you, then you can use appropriate force. The idea behind retreating is that people don't kill someone when they could have walked away from the situation. Hate to say it, but LE was wrong on several points made in this video.
Objection: you mentioned that deadly force is allowed in an attempt to prevent felonies. If the wet bandits are attempting to commit a felony then Kevin has the right to use deadly force.
Also, Kevin has no reason to assume that people who would break into his house knowing that he is there would not do him harm, bodily or otherwise. On top of that Kevin is eight years old, no judge or jury is going to try a child for defending himself, maybe Texas.
@@viktornapolitano6113 These men were breaking into his home armed with crowbars and shouted "I'm gonna kill that kid!" several times throughout the third act.
@@hd_inmemoriam Exactly-He got separated while looking for batteries for his Talkboy recorder and started following some guy who looked like his dad from behind
@@hd_inmemoriam it is kinda their fault for not counting the heads to make sure everyone got on the plane and also partly Kevin’s for stopping knowing they were late.... but mainly the people working on the plane because if they saw the ticket the boy had then we wouldn’t have had these issues again
to this day, I wonder why they didn't just call a good friend asking them to check in on Kevin ... at least. I mean I'd assume they have some friends there. They have like a dozen kids. Surely they know some person or other who they could ask to go over and babysit him for a night...
I did one already. Ransom is convicted for around 20-30 or maybe a life sentence, Marta is about 10 years down the hole, and Walt is charged with at least five years, if not more.
It’s been years since I saw the movie, I can’t imagine Kevin would go to prison, he’s a minor and imagine the publicity. And real criminals were involved and the abandonment issue. Remember the pissed off judge in “What’s Up Doc”? Can you imagine someone like him trying to unravel it all?
@@meganparrish807Great point, her husband and her were only responsible of Kevin and his older brother, the cousins were responsibility of their respective parents.
I think she's just over worked and clearly her entire family (or are they all in laws?) are monsters that do not care about each other. My parents forgot me lots of places. It happens. And yes, getting yelled at for something you sibling did is also normal. Sucks, but happens.
There’s hundreds of thousands of laws. What does that tell you? The government is literally shoving it in your face and telling you that they are trying to make you into a criminal, it’s all a trap.
well i was bummed that lighting firecrackers in a pot inside your own house was somehow illegal in illinois. mark that off my list of states to ever live in.
You need to make a video of the second Home Alone film. Here’s some of the crimes that Kevin, his parents and the Wet Bandits committed: Kevin- Stole his father’s cash and credit card via accident because he’s looking for batteries for his Talkboy. Committed credit card fraud for a hotel room. Destroyed a window of a toy store in order to stop a robbery committed by the Wet Bandits. Trespassed in a house under remodeling and construction left by his uncle and aunt. Even pinched a woman’s buttocks, so she can punch the Wet Bandits. Kevin’s parents- the same you said in this video. Wet Bandits- Escape from prison, robbery, owning a firearm. It’s illegal to own a firearm as a felon since Harry and Marv are felons. kidnapping, even attempted murder.
This channel has taught me that if someone ever tries to hurt me or break into my home I will be going to jail for a longer time than the attacker/burglar, because I’m not leaving my own home.
Even worse. He didn't get into civil liability. In real life, burglars have sued homeowners when they got hurt inside the house. And they've won their cases, sometimes.
Also I don't think he could call the police until the very end. An important plot point was the phone lines were down. When they left for the airport the repair person told the family it would take a few days to fix them. That's why Kevin's parents couldn't call him from Paris. At the very end he managed to call 911, but I don't think he could call them before that and tell them he saw burglars stalking his house and overhead them saying the were coming back that night.
We could also add that Harry was driving the van when he almost hit Kevin. He could have received a citation and/or charges to reckless operation of a motor vehicle and potentially be charged with vehicular manslaughter had Kevin got hit.
"Devin Ratray told Yahoo; “They decided it would be unkind to put a girl in that role of just being funny-looking. The art director had a son who was more than willing to volunteer for the part. I think if he had known it would become the highest-grossing family comedy of all time, he might have had second thoughts about it.”
@@davidwallace7543 Sorry. But still. This lawyer is acting as a prosecutor and overreaching in certain ways. Including the fact that Kevin was still being pursued and therefore he was still in danger, the treehouse was still on Mccallister property, and the fact that Kevin actually shouldn't be tried at all at 8, means that there are problems with his issue. If anything, the parents should be charged with anything that Kevin would actually get charged with due to him learning these things as a result of their parenting. On a side note, someone get those parents a condom or 7.
Are you going to do Home Alone 2? I really would love to see you evaluate that one too since more damage/harm is done in that one. Plus, The same parents possibly charged a second time? Not to mention Kevin is not home, but inside a hotel in New York where his victims were, besides the Sticky Bandits, some of the hotel employees.
Objection on the cutting the rope: Kevin McAllister attempted retreat against two dedicated pursuers who he had attempted to dissuade pursuit of on multiple instances through various non-lethal and lethal means. As part of his retreat, he cut the rope that would be used to pursue him. That they happened to be on the rope is not inherently part of his responsibility and indeed proves that he was correct in assuming that his attempted retreat did not dissuade them. His assumptions are further justified in that his continued retreat did not prevent his assailants from eventually catching up to him and uttering multiple threats that a jury separately concluded amounted to attempted second degree murder. In other words, his actions could reasonably amount to reasonable force in self-defense as part of complying with his duty to retreat. That they were attempting to return to the house at the time and he could've waited for them to return is heresay and may be difficult to prove in court
Actually, as far as I know, the tree house he retreats to is still private property, and he only cuts the rope once they attempt to once again follow him further into his property. Therefore, I believe in conjunction with your statement, the castle laws would still apply.
@@matthewpoff2077 they would have to prove that they we're halfway in court, somewhat hard to do as it's their word against that of a child they were attacking
I would think that cutting Harry and Marv off the zipline would still be considered self defense due to the common law concept of curtilage (if I'm spelling that correctly). The Home isn't just the house, but a kind of nebulously defined area surrounding the home that is kind of conceptual. But the treehouse could be considered an extension of the home itself, into which he was driven. If, for instance, I were driven from my house and am driven to a tool shed, the totality of the circumstance might still allow the castle doctrine to apply if I use the hedge trimmers as a lethal weapon against my attackers. The same can be said of the treehouse.
👮♂️Should Kevin go to jail?
🚀Get the CURIOSITYSTREAM/NEBULA BUNDLE curiositystream.com/legaleagle It’s the only way to get the BLOOPER REEL!
FYI, I got "Kids Die Hard" from my friend Patrick Willems. Check out his video on why Home Alone is Great: ruclips.net/video/O7XlmP1aa-w/видео.html
play the ace attorney trilogy game next, you reacted to the anime's first episode once but it feels better to play it and also the plpt thickens!
Love your videos 😄
You should change the tumbnail, it looks like you have a Hitler mustache.
When Kevin goes to the treehouse and cuts the line, it is still on his property so wouldn't that still apply to the castle defense law?
LegalEagle : If Kevin were to be accused of attempted murder (assuming his homemade traps are found to be unnecessarily deadly force outside of a stand your ground state) would this qualify as premeditated 1st degree because he neglected to notify the police and planned specific deadly injuries to specific intruders ahead of time? (i.e deadly force traps such as the paint cans, hot iron, cut rope, blow torch and even the hidden foot spike)
Can we also talk about the fact that when a mother calls and says her child is home alone, and the police went to check on the house, and get no response, shouldn't that be an indication that there's a problem, not that everything is fine??
The parents could sue the police for that. Claim the damages to kid's psyche through the ordeal caused by police negligence.
On top of this, the child abandonment charge on the parents would likely never stick for this reason. I doubt that Kevin was alone for 24-hours before the police were notified and they dropped the ball on the welfare check.
@@cameron4997 Contacting the police was certainly the right move on their part and considering most of the neighbors were gone as well as everyone in the family being on the trip, they weren't left many other options than the police. I'd assume the police would at least leave someone to monitor the home for the kid or check back in several times since a missing child is kind of a big deal. When the police failed to carry out their part, the parents would likely just get it noted on their record and told not to let it happen again.
Once it does kind of happen again for the sequel, they might get in a little more trouble though.
Not really it's the Chicago police
Talk about a kid having shotgun
Edited: judge me with all logic as possible
Technically the zipline that leads from the house window outside actually leads to a tree house in the Kevin's backyard, which is still on the property of which Kevin's family owns and therefore the castle law permitting the use of deadly force is still technically in effect. Kevin may have left the home but he is still on what is legally considered to be his property.
Objection castle law only pertains to the inside of your actual house. If you’re outside your house even if you’re on your property
@@joshuanash6401 Except in the case of an out house or other such building that can be reasonably be considered as a dwelling. A dwelling being any structure that can provide shelter from the elements.
There also comes the issue that they were still pursuing him, him, not property or goods, him. That gives him self defense rights that are not exclusive to the property.
For example if I went out on the street and someone chases me, If I have a gun and they refuse to stop pursuing me I can legally use deadly force. The same concept applies here.
Illinois doesn't have castle doctrine
@@csmith9573 Illinois justifiable force provisions can be found in 720 ILCS 5/7. In Illinois, you may use justifiable force:
To defend yourself or another person;
To protect your dwelling; or
To protect your property.
That is castle doctrine
Luke Woodside its important to note the distinction that in many jurisdictions you have a “duty to retreat” before resorting to lethal force% meaning you must have exhausted all your options for evading direct confrontation before turning to meet your assailant. Furthermore self defense means you can use lesser or equal force to meet the threat. If a man us chasing you saying hes gonna beat your ass you cant turn around and shoot him unless he presents a weapon. States that do not have this stated in their laws make up the controversial “stand your ground” jurisdictions meaning any perceived threat can be met with lethal force (ie florida) regardless if the assailant is armed, on your property, or even started the confrontation.
"we know that you're in there, and that you're all alone"
A reasonable jury could agree that the child may feel immediately threatened by two adults seeking violent entry into a home in which they are alone, and excessive use of force may be the child's only means of survival. Thus, all actions taken by the 8-year old could be cleared in self-defense argument.
"Excessive use of force"?
It clearly wasn't enough.
Additionally, there is no way any court would expect an 8 year old to understand use of force.
@@Aqueox Exactly, it's very hard to argue that Kevin went too far when the bandits still caught him. Clearly this movie takes place in an alternate reality where people are much more resistant to physical injury, and Kevin's traps should be seen as less dangerous than they would be in the real world.
@@AqueoxYes, the robbers repeated and alarmingly reckless attacks on the home and safety of this child clearly show that they are an unreasonable force that can't be stopped with even extreme uses of force. They repeatedly recieved injuries that could've been fatal to a normal man and continue their invasion despite it all. It's clear that the only thing that would've stopped these men is death or incapacitation.
@@Daybreak81523Exactly, the law says a lot about how one can use deadly force only if they reason this or that... This child can't be expect to have an adults reasoning no matter how intelligent or skilled they are as an inventor. skill or intelligence is not equivalent to a matured mental state.
There has always been the argument that he didn’t call the police since he is first introduced to Harry as a police officer and could think he is a real officer and others could be just as bad.
Also the police in this movie are comically inept and portrayed as the worst service imaginable. I mean, the family called and reported a stranded child and they showed almost 0 interest.
Also, he did some inadvertent shoplifting, so he's scared of the police.
Also i don't know why people forget this, but he thinks he MADE HIS FAMILY DISAPPEAR. So he doesn't want cops showing up and taking him away because he's a kid all by himself who was also shoplifting earlier
He didn't call the police because the phone lines were down from the storm. This is why his parents couldn't call him from France. The guy repairing the telephone pole as they're leaving the house for the airport shouts that it's going to take the phone company multiple days to restore service.
@@FireMarshallStev true. I forgot about that but, since Kevin wasn't out there when the family left, he may not have known the lines were down, especially since we don't see him call the police until the end, maybe from the neighbors house.
I am not buying this argument.
Prison Inmate: What you in for?
Kevin: Everything
It all started when someone ate my cheese pizza....
@@LegalEagle Honestly, i'd be traumatized for life too if someone ate my pizza. That assault was completely justified.
@@LegalEagle lol
Just wait until Home Alone 2.
@@mr.midgardville If Kevin couldn't eat anything else besides that pizza, then he could fear starving to death. His brother tried to slowly murder his brother!
His parents did contact the police when they realized he was missing. The police office checked the house but since Kevin was scared he never answered the door. Police office incorrectly concluded he wasn't home. If the police officer did find him. Tempory arrangements could have been made so that he was supervised until awaiting his parents return. The police bares some responsibility in his failings.
The police officer that checked the house should be in trouble because he knew that there was supposed to be a young child alone in the house and when nobody responded when he knocked he just left. What if something had happened to Kevin and he had been incapable of responding to the officer and due to that died? What kind of idiot just knocks on the door of a house that a little kid is likely to have been alone in for a decent amount of time and just leaves when nothing responds?
@@jedodom3056 To be fair, he shouldn't be in any sort of trouble. As evidenced on this channel the police can legally bomb your house to rubble and provide no recompense, so something this relatively minute would make no sense for them to bear responsibility for.
@@rocketrelm1125 It would still likely remove culpability (or at least mitigate) any charges leveled at the parents.
plus he's an officer, they are legit to teach children not to answer the door to anyone you don't know
They should’ve station a cop outside (in plain clothes so he doesn’t scare Kevin) to wait for him
If stealing from older brother counts as a felony, then i am pretty sure all prisons in the world would have a crowd crisis
In his defense: He had reason to assume that Buzz was no more. I guess US has some sort of laws about embezzling estate though, and maybe there are taxes to be paid too, but I'd guess Kevin could have just considered those to be his inheritance. Can't assume 8 year old to know how long it takes to pronounce missing person as dead :D
@@ulla7378 well, if buzz was missing more than 48 hours he could have been stated as dead
@@howiestillgamez5326 not nearly long enough. You are declared dead after 7 years
@@pws3rd170 wait.. oh sorry 48hrs to be delclared
missing
@@howiestillgamez5326 that sounds right, well for the average adult. For teens and kids there are different thresholds for being declared missing
Kevin can never be charged for repeated attempted murder, because in HOME ALONE 2, he already knows that Harry and Marv are immortal.
But Harry and Marv were trying to kill him the whole time he was in New York! Plus, he tried asking for help from the hotel staff but the staff was too worried about the credit card theft to help him.
Objection: as a minor, Kevin should not be expected to accurately judge how much force is considered "reasonable" or distinguish deadly from non-deadly force.
When you're getting invaded, no force is too mucj.
@@wastelandlegocheem the law clearly disagrees. as do any sane person.
@@mikedalby2978 i'd rather live
@@wastelandlegocheem rather be judged by the twelve then carried by the six.
@@mikedalby2978 These burglars were making every continues effort to enter the property despite knowing that a minor was in there home alone. In my book this is a clear "kid get a real shut gun and aim for the face"
"Kids' Die Hard" is about the most succinct description of Home Alone that I've ever heard.
dk 109 right?! I was a little angry at myself for not realizing it.
There's actually a REAL kids' "Die Hard." It's called "Playing Dangerous." A Kevin McAllister knockoff actually fights terrorists. It was shot as a "hard-R" movie but edited down to PG-13.
There's also the "Baby geniuses" franchise.
I think "Toy Soldiers" (1991) or "Masterminds" (1997) also qualify better.
Underrated
"No, Kevin didn't make his family disappear, they abandoned him."
That was so brutal and hilarious I died laughing
Memento mori
...Unus...Annus..
But if he did, would it be illegal!
It was merely a matter of convenient coincidence, so as a kid, he would’ve likely believed his wish had come true. Lol
@@hannahbloom if the nineth lion ate the sun
To that first point, I could say that they truly believed he was with them (or at least were unaware of him being missing) until they realized at which point they made every effort to get back as soon as possible and care for him until they could get back
Watching this feels like watching film theory, but more *Sophisticated*
Less Diet Coke jokes tho
That just a theory a comment theory
I'd love to see colab!
Suit and Tie Film Theory
No watching this is watching somebody over explain how to put cheese on a pizza
Goes into every single detail and they ramble on about 1 detail for hours
OBJECTION! Kevin doesn’t technically leave his property. His treehouse and his yard is still a part of his property.
The neighbor's house isn't.
Aren't you that fire guy?
Castle law is generally about the building, not the property line.
The neighborhood is his kingdom
he also has the ability to retreat from the yard and call the police from the safety of his home which probably a jury would find, the problem is not that the yard is the property the problem is he left the safety of his home to engage aggressively
“Kevin starts off by assaulting his brother over minor teasing” Are we charging every sibling ever for this
Everything is illegal. Everything.
He’s not saying to charge him, he’s saying that it is a crime. That’s the point of the video
If so, me and all of my siblings need lawyers. Also a parent who teaches us to use our words.
r/woosh
Yeah if that was charged there'd be a lot of child court cases...
The real crimes are in the second movie where he goes out of his way to lure Harry and Marv into deathtraps in a renovated building. Plus all the identity theft.
Then there was Uncle Frank threatening to assault a minor. (Ie slap him silly)
@@ryanhoward3383thats more of an understandable thing though. He was recording him while he was in the shower. Assaulting a child is never good but it was probably more to get him out.
the real crime is the cops who should have done a better wellness check on Kevin
When Kevin commited identity theft?
@@Florentina-ox9xq When he checked in the hotel, he faked his voice on the phone and used his dads credit card, pretending to be an adult.
Objection: The shoplifting was clearly accidental: frightened by the man in front of him, he turns and runs away, forgetting momentarily about the toothbrush in his hand.
Agreed. All he had to do was drop the toothbrush as he was retreating, or just stop for the officer and hand it back as he explained that the old guy simply scared him.
@@Dark_Mishra While I agree, I must ask this question. Is Kevin, an 8 year old, who is frightened of an adult and then yelled at and pursued by more adults, going to think of returning the toothbrush and calmly explaining?
In my opinion, I don't believe that scenario is likely. Most children rarely think of consequences or think that a discussion will get them out of said consequences.
Therefore, I submit that Kevin, from his perspective and within his capacity for problem solving, made the best decision he could.
@@Thunderous115 He could just return it/
@@Thunderous115 I am a minor. Can confirm that consequences don’t exist to us.
But he realized right after he left that he still had it and he ran from the police instead of talking to him and saying it was an accident
Kevin’s family wasn’t just negligent, they were also emotionally abusive. If you REALLY listen/watch closely, you can see that his own family members just hate him and bully him when he wasn’t intending to be a brat. Especially his mother in the beginning, like damn woman! They write him like he’s supposed to be the brat, but in reality, if you pay close attention, he really doesn’t deserve all the neglect and bullying. It’s gotten so bad that I’d say cps would’ve been called on the parents, especially since NO ONE notices he was missing before they boarded the plane! They’ve definitely committed a crime with child neglect and abuse.
Exactly
Like at least double check the head count.
@@andrewliu8048 added 75 years ago to the name. The real time stamp on the right
Maybe it's just supposed to be from his perspective?
Nope in Illinois there is no charge for emotional abusive parenting mainly because there’s a grey point in between emotional abuse and correction so there is however a physical abuse charge but that doesn’t apply here
Objection: Given his age he was significantly less physically able than the adult burglars, so even after he left the house he still didn't have an ability to safely retreat. Especially given the malice they've shown toward him personally.
You say that but _did you see what he does?_
They had also claimed multiple times that they had the intent to murder kevin
LuigiMaster285 he called the police in the movie, that’s why they arrived
They were also currently in pursuit of him in an attempt to cause serious bodily harm if not murder him, so him cutting them down actually goes along with him using possible deadly force to defend himself.
xFuzzzyGames they only wanted to hurt him after he tortured them
Fun fact! The picture of Buzz’s girlfriend is actually the directors son in a wig because they didn’t want to actually call a real girl ugly.
Also, don't call Buzz's actions "Harmless taunting."
The amount of bullying that Kevin receives from his siblings and family is a psychological nightmare. In fact, Kevin's behaviors could have been 100% attributed to his home life. I'd say the McCallisters are in need of some counseling.
grow up lmao
@@gotgunpowder Says someone who's clearly never been bullied. I envy your naivety.
Yeah, it’s no surprise he fantasized about maiming and torturing two bumbling idiots like this as he quickly descends into sociopathy.
Cinema Therapy.
Yup, Kevin was the victim of some serious emotional abuse
Fun fact: They wanted Buzz's girlfriend look ugly but they didn't want to make anyone feel bad so they used the art director's son
um..i don't think that is buzz's sister. kevin and buzz are related by brothers and that "sister" is nowhere in their family picture
@@buffycatnip oops wrong word
@@buffycatnip Nobody said anything about their sister
@@Llamamanllama its edited he made a mistake
Oh Yh this is big brain time
"Kevin is a criminal mastermind like Jigsaw and Martha Stuart"
That freaking killed me, which makes LegalEagle a murderer too.
That was smooth.
So he killed him?
LegalEagle wasn't kidding. _EVERYTHING_ is illegal.
I wish there will be a Kids die hard movie with the DIE HARD cast as children. (sorry for Piggybacking)
I 100% believe Kevin grew up to become Jigsaw.
In the scene where Kevin nearly gets flattened by the work van, the scene was actually played in reverse so that Culkin would not actually be in danger of bodily harm. He walked backwards and the van was backed up the driveway during the filming.
"Because everything is illegal." Wow, I think that's the most Lawyer thing you've ever said lol
It's not wrong. As a civil litigator I walk around and constantly think "that's a lawsuit" "that's a lawsuit" ""that guy is a walking lawsuit"
@@xger21 wow, can u ever relax?
@@circa81 He already is in his relaxed state lol
Thanks everyone, I've never had a commend liked this much
@@xger21 Wow, that must be...kind of annoying, knowing the law and seeing it being broken literally everywhere you look.
Kevin steals a toothbrush: im a criminal
Kevin when he attempts to murder 2 guys with a shotgun, a blowtorch, and many various objects: this is fine
editing this comment to tell you one thing, i know its a bb gun, i just wanted to make a joke here.
Stealing was unnecessary, defending himself was.
Shotgun? That was a BB gun. A shotgun would have exploded Marv's head and probably shattered Kevin's shoulder.
@@tremedar ruclips.net/video/omzN-4C84Xw/видео.html
@Deon Denis yea plenty empty houses around,maybe they enjoyed the pain?
It’s self defense / home defense
Kid: *breathes*
Legal eagle: so much about this is illegal
Kids are the worst. See my COPPA video.
Funny @@LegalEagle, very funny.
@@LegalEagle agreed
@@LegalEagle Are you dodging the biggest malpractice example in living history on purpose? Or are you dodging it because of your own dishonest politcal reasons displayed in past videos? The IG report just uncovered an FBI lawyer manufacturing evidence to obtain and continue a FISA warrant on a member of the Trumps staff. That is a huge deal and here you are making Home Alone critiques.
I mean he's not a lawyer in the case so he has no real obligation to cover it on a youtube video at any haste. He possibly could be doing the video right now but those take time. Especially if you are researching the law to cover it.
The very fact that he even brought light to the fact that Trump is possibly guilty of anything kinda sticks him closer to the liberal side if any. If that's what you trying to imply. Lawyers in general tend to be centralists if anything. They make enough money to be happy and most already do what they want to do, so they don't usually support republican beliefs. Some do, but probably not the majority.
Especially since most Lawyers know the law. This gives them a headstart into knowing why the system is built the way it is. Therefore the only time I ever hear of Lawyers committing things like tax fraud are when they are tied to people who also commit it openly. Just an example but I can probably go down a whole list of things Republicans openly break the law on.
Liberals these days seem to basically attack anyone who is even remotely neutral. Even other Liberals. When a Liberal makes me look like an alt right then that is probably time to real yourself out of your closeminded little crevice under that rock you living in.
Objection: Doesn't the treehouse on the property's lawn still count as "home" and still be under a "castle law" therefore letting kevin use deadly force to defend his dwelling "the treehouse"?
I'd add they were still in active pursuit of him, likely with intent to harm, by climbing along the rope to the tree house he just ran to. And I think the treehouse may still count because stuff like a covered front porch does or an attached garage. Until he cut the line I'd say it was an attached tree house, lol.
Plus, they were about 2 floors up, which would put their feet somewhere between 10 and 20 feet above the ground. They would have to land directly on top of their heads to cause any real injury, let alone death
Objection;
You missed the potential for a charge of resisting arrest after stealing the toothbrush.
It would actually be fleeing and eluding an officer as opposed to resisting arrest.
Resisting arrest is when you fight an officer
Well he is 8 so
I was told to change my name So here
I have a feeling the guy who commented is from Europe, most jurisdictions over here treat fleeing the cops as a passive resistance, whereas what you think as resisting arrest would be called active resistance
IceHax ah ok thanks for the clarification
The real crime is standing still as a blowtorch incinerates your scalp.
He's not, Kevin wedged him in the door.
It's invigorating.
@@marhawkman303 Bud you clearly didn't watch the movie then, he was just standing there while the head was set a blaze.
@@iatnehmaster8132 ablaze is one word.
@@calska140 that word...
I do not think it means what you think it means.
12:35 What, no mention of Marv screaming, "I'm gonna KILL this kid!" upon entering through the window? That sounds like cause to fear for one's life to me.
The issue with that is theres a burden of proof, no audio or cctv means it did not happen
dude its a movie what happens in the movie is treated as such
that charge would be dropped for lack of evidence
@@lukewoodside9420 I agree. Also, he wasn’t under immediate harm at first, so it can’t really be considered self defense.
@@lukewoodside9420 Then there's no video of what Kevin did either....case dismissed
You forgot Kevin's animal endangermant, when he sets Buzz's tarantula loose in the house, and then later sets the spider on the face of one of the Wet Bandits.
Good catch.
Animal endamgerment only applies to mammals and birds. Insects are objects
Remember that the "reasonably" thing changes since he's a child.
A jury could reasonably assume that Kevin didn't think cutting them down on that zipline would do much more than just delay them from catching him. Which was, of course, his intention.
So in other words, his wealthy father's lawyer could probably defend Kevin well enough that attempted homicide never sees the light of day.
And of course as you mentioned he's a child. He's not likely to get any significant sort of legal discipline even if he were found guilty.
I would’ve tried him as an adult. Made an example out of Kevin
@@illusioNery No
Plus their brain isn’t developed well, so they don’t have the same logic. Almost all of the charges against Kevin would’ve been dropped or lowered because it is reasonable to assume he was perceived things worse than they actually were.
@@pineforest1442 Naaah, that's just an excuse to take consequences off of someone. Throw the book at Kevin so it's made clear what justice actually looks like
He's 8 years old, in Illinois. Children under the age of 13 can't be incriminated. There will always be exceptions to this, like classmates planning and murdering another classmate, but Kevin 99% would not be an exception.
11:03 To be fair, I think the main reason why he doesn't call the police is because he knows that Marv (I think it was Marv) was dressed up as an officer, and he might still think that he is an officer. And if he's an officer, calling the police, who might also be criminals, would create more problems then it helps solve.
Been a while but didn't they also cut the phone lines?
@@nicholaschisholm7018 no, the power was just down to the phone lines, but the repair men fixed it, it had nothing to do with Harry and Marv, it was just the power outage
Harry was impersonating an officer.
It was Harry, but yes.
@@revine9243 the outage happened 3 days ago in movie time.
Objection - When Kevin cuts the line on the Wet bandits it is after the intimidation and threat of bodily harm, they are in close pursuit and as such add immediate mitigating circumstances of fear for ones life
Yup. And this is after shouting their intent to kill him several times throughout the night.
And even the duty to retreat can be easily argued against, especially since they still manage to catch up to him after all of his attempts, which include the use of potentially deadly force, that alone would indicate that he had tried all other options, after which he was only saved by the intervention of a local public servant. (note, I call him a public servant due to the fact that we see him salting the sidewalk, which I believe is the duty of the city, and thus him having that as his job makes him a public servant, as he is employed by the local government, could be wrong)
@@dragoncatgaming5481 Hence why his punishment was just cold pizza.
Plus in his yard, technically his property
@@babs2952 cold pizza is a prize thus showing that people are endorsing such psycopath like behavior
I think the judge/jury would let Kevin off entirely. Defense plus child mentality plus how it would play in the media.
And Kevin did try non-dangerous methods of scaring the bandits off; the mannequin dance party and the mobster movie with added sound effects. After both of those tricks failed, it was reasonable for Kevin to assume that Harry and Marv were determined to kill him and violent defense was necessary.
And Kevin would have witnesses to defend himself (Old Man Marley and Pigeon Lady)
_"Everything is illegal"_
[Legal Eagle]
_"There is no such thing as innocence. Only degrees of guilt!"_
[Lord Inquisitor Karamazov]
hmm.. seems to be an attitude that comes with the job
Me: *reads quote* hmmm looks like a Warhammer 40K line.
*clicks more*
Oh
its not everything being illegal its preemptive punishment
I mean haven't you seen the books with laws in them? My lawyer has a wall that measures ~20' long, and 6' high dedicated to nothing but books with laws in them. He even jokes about how he has to replace them all the time, because the government changes the laws every year.
Well, as a ruler of a country, you would need to prevent any possible loopholes in laws that can cause a criminal to go free, the preventing of loopholes is actually what makes everything illegal.
Let alone that you would prefer to have citizens unable to overthrow you, so the only person who really is free to do most things without any legal reprocussions, is the ruler of the country. The Queen of England is technically the most powerful person alive because of that. She can literally have someone arrested in some countries because she doesnt like their face and have them executed. Ofcourse she doesnt do that, and there would be objections to it in practise, but legally speaking, she can kill about 1/6th of the human population without any punishment.(technically 100% of humanity if you include tourists)
Sounds Cardassian!
Objection: you stated that Kevin retreated when he left the house so it would be battery or attempted murder to cut the rope from the house to the tree house. However because the tree house was still on the property and Kevin was essentially trapped in the tree house on his own property with two criminals attempting to reach him with the intent to harm him. This would still be self defense.
Correct. The simple fact they pursued him on the line was grounds for him to believe he was still in danger
More Kevin taunting and baiting the wet bandits, to cut the rope.
That checks out with the castle doctrine.
Was he really trapped tho? The criminals were moving at what pace? Over what distance?
Castle Law is the entire fenced in property. If this were only the primary building, it would be a *_Keep Law._*
Objection (?): Weren’t they chasing him when he “retreated?” Doesn’t that justify his deadly force considering he was still in danger?
given that he is free to continue running away, no.
Mar Hawkman Is a child, he would get caught by them, so it's totally reasonable
@@gamerito100 I'm not so sure that's a given. Especially since he doesn't have to outrun them, just get to help.
@@marhawkman303 where would he get help tho? Isn't everyone in his neighborhood on vacation or asleep?
@@ericw.1620 call the police
Technically this is self defense. Harry and Marv are actively pursuing him.
In Illinois, anyone under the age of 13, the criminally insane, and those who are involuntarily intoxicated or drugged cannot be found guilty of a crime. I was quite surprised by this, because in the UK, the age of criminal responsibility is 10.
It's the same in Australia, however it's more of "you can be tried as an adult from this age" rather than a blanket application thereof.
So, if the system says "yeah you should know not to do this by 10" then you MAY be tried as an adult but it's probably not going to happen
10?? That’s seems a bit young to me. At 10 I certainly wouldn’t be able to figure out what merits self-defense...
@@agent_sus3273 because of the James Bulger case.
@@ninah7732 I mean, I guess I’m also a unique circumstance, so… not everyone had asd so I don’t know:
@@agent_sus3273 I got charged for assault at 10, it made me not lash out at people ever again without good reason. Then I was later told my record got cleared when I was 17, it gets wiped at 16. I’d say the police getting involved when I was 10 was a good idea.
11:00 *OBJECTION*
Kevin DID “call the police” he did so from his neighbor’s house. The phone was not working in his house.
If the phone was not working, then how did he order pizza?
Phones were repaired after the parents had stopped trying to contact the house and started trying to get home. The criminally lax police force never called the McCalesters back to inform them they were unable to contact the child because they are supremely incompetent, so Kevin's family was unaware that they needed to keep trying to contact him and instead focused on returning home, the phone he called the cops on was in his home just up the stairs from where he spidered Harry and Marv.
@@madestmadhatter the phones weren't repaired.
the long distance lines were down while the local lines at the time were still active
it's understandable for a kid in such a situation to be wary of calling the police anyway given that they were already shown they're willing to impersonate the police and kids weren't/aren't taken seriously
if the uniform looks legitimate harry and marv very well could've said they were patroling the neighborhood because of the bandits and likely not been questioned about it
moreover, when then cops were called first they were dismissive, and the moment they got no response about a missing child left...a child calling and saying they need help at X location would've likely been met with the same stupid response (1 cop coming out, who knocks at the door of a frightened individual and then just..walks away)
and that's something that's ACTUALLY happened, women called the cops about an individual that broke into their home
the dispatcher told the caller to stay quiet and they'll dispatch
the cop knocked and then left (with no further investigation, including not checking the rear of the house that was reported to have been broken into)
the women were raped by said intruder
the courts found that the cops did nothing wrong
even back then it was well known police have no duty to do shit.
even when the courts issue restraining and protection orders whether or not they do anything is up to them and if they decide not to they're legally protected
don't gotta protect or react to people who call the police
don't gotta react to mass shootings
don't gotta enforce court protection/restraining orders
honestly our police force has no reason to exist, they've no legal obligation to do their job even when not doing it results in deaths
@@xilrondo2907 Where are you getting all that stuff from about police not having any duty to respond? That's nonsense.
@@sammykent5752 "protect" not respond.
DeShaney vs. Winnebago
Town of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales
Warren v. District of Columbia
the parkland shooting lawsuit that was thrown out because the officers had no duty to protect as students aren't considered "in custody"
yeah...it's not nonsense, the police have no legal obligation to protect you from anything, even if they swore their protection or were ordered to do so by a judge
Legal Eagle: one year probation for the parents
McCallister parents: hold my Home Alone 2
Ooooo Kevin commits identity theft
the real question is how did harry and marven get out in under a year for home alone 2.
brandy w. If i remember correctly they broke out of prison
@@brandyw.8034 they broke out after a prison riot
@@brandyw.8034 Home Alone 2 is set 2 years after the first one because in this one Kevin is 8 in Home Alone 2 he's 10
The only real crime that Kevin commited is is shoplifting the toothbrush.
LegalEagle: "Where I'll see you in court"
Me: Is that a theat
It's a promise.
@@LegalEagle Are you refering to gen. Kegame from Shake hands with the devil?
Wait, who’s the defendant and prosecutor?
@@rattheninja2877 Oh! I'll be the judge!
I knew it bernie...
Felony child abandonment requires intent, the McAlisters were reckless, but they did not intentionally abandon Kevin. Perhaps there is a negligence charge which is more appropriate.
They also called the police who went to the house but Kevin hid so they have up
also, this happened in the 80s. i doubt laws were that strict back then. lol
@@the0ne809 90s, but still, the law probably wouldn't care that much.
Is it just me that feels their entire body clamp up when Marv stands on that nail?
Can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen that movie, but it gets me every, single, time.
For me, it's the nailgun (staplegun?) to the balls. Ouch.
Gets me.....right in the Schnozzz!
Ive stepped on a nail twice, so I know that pain fhdjdjdjdj
Ikr
@@wafflecult27 Same here. It wasn't fun either time. First time I was 4 years old. The second time I was 12. I remember crying hard both times. I cringe and feel physical pain in the two spots that I stepped on the nails at.
To be fair, Kevin was a top tier house sitter, imagine if nobody was there
This is without question one of the most under-appreciated channels on YT. Here's to your future 1M subs
Fallout Plays oh my God I cannot believe his channel has less than 1M subs. The production value and content quality here is just amazing. I’m not even a lawyer and these videos entertain me like no other. He’ll certainly be huge someday.
ok so uh yea as a huge d2 player I am pleasantly surprised that Fallout Plays also watches legal eagle :D
now 1 mill
1.38M as of 11/20/2020!...+1 for my subscription too!
“Because everything is illegal.”
Gen Z: Your honor, I plead guilty for breathing. Give me the death sentence. Please.
*Distant sound of O'hare Air*
@@2Ws2Ls let it die, let it die, let it shrivel up and die
Is this accurate or is this accurate?
@@cheffries6066 probally
Millennials: am I a joke to you?
Objection: 10:52 "Reasonable Belief of harm" He's a minor faced with two adults attempting to burglarize his home. I would say that short of killing them, any force used could be construed as reasonable. He's compensating for his lack of size and strength with traps and other such "force multipliers".
Short of killing them?
Weakness is oozing from your comment. You won't even kill to defend that which is yours by right... Pathetic.
Exactly!
I remember when, in grade 6, my teacher made us do a group project where we had to rewrite Home Alone for another holiday. We had to do Easter. It was actually really good.
please tell me it involved crucifixion XD
@@SykoMuffin actually no
@@SykoMuffin That would be a pretty dark holiday movie. I remember the one guy in the first season of OZ getting crucified on the prisons gym floor by JK Simmons.
LeagalEagle: says that Kevin and jigsaw are different people
theorists like me: nope, same person
I'm here for that cinematic universe.
Screen Rant and All time movies had a good videos about this theory.
But that just a theeeeeoory... a game theeeeeoooeortyy
Something something ambitious crossover
@@tackontitan I mean... A film theory!
It’s funny how everyone says Kevin should’ve called 911 instead of setting traps, but of course if he did just that, we wouldn’t have a movie
AND on top of that it probably wouldn't pan out well because the police wouldn't come instantly, so he would still be in danger while waiting for them.
Plus the phones lines are down plus he thought he might get into deep shit for stealing that toothbrush
What he really still should do is call the police, but have the traps ready
@@lollikabosso.w.n7153 he couldn’t because the phones weren’t working. However he could have tried to go to a neighbor’s house, but so many of them were traveling that there would be no guarantee that any house he went to would have anyone in it
He didn’t even have a phone 💀
Even though he “assaulted” Buzz and stole from Buzz, do those actions really need to be prosecuted because those small actions happen inside of the family and should be dealt with by the parents, not the police.
Also Buzz is a huge jerk and I would've punched him too. The theft can be written off as he thought Buzz had completely dissapeared by that point in the movie and therefore he believed the property no longer belonged to Buzz in the eyes of the law
@ Carter Dryden I second the notion.
Yens
Probably his parents declined to press charges.
If assault of a sibling is illegal then all sibling would be put in jail. So no. Also kids steal all the time so no.
A MASSIVE area where the rest of the family got off easy is the fact that the child was not only old enough but was also capable of taking care of themselves. If the child was the opposite the entire rest of the family would have been in a SHITSTORM of legal trouble.
*"Kevin is a criminal Mastermind"*
*Kevin:* _* shocked Pikachu face *_
*shocked Kevin McCallister face*
@@LegalEagle what about the Castle Doctrine? o_0
@@katanafourzeronine still doesn't give him.the right to boobytrap the house
@@alexthai5223 technically speaking he was putting deterrents due to hostiles planned assault on a known occupied property. If a group of hostile people lets say a militia was known to be coming to your house to assault while knowing you are home, then do you find it should be illegal to set up defenses to slow down the stronger and more deadly forces. The other question is did he know they were just there to steal or did he believe they were after his well-being which they actually were by the end of the film.
Note: I feel the area would do well to have more call 911 publicity, since it seems that they have not done a good job spreading trust to locals. Although there is the point that Alan probably would not want a policeman to come to the house while the house is booby trapped, but yes I feel calling the cops would be an important thing for Alan to do instead.
No he's not. Hes the good son.
"Everything is illegal" You should put that on a shirt and sell it. That'd be some good merch
that and "The Bailiff Will Tackle You"
But that's illegal
Apologies, that shirt is illegal
you would be breaking the law
I find that quote kinda creepy
"Kevin acquires the taste of blood after assaulting his brother." and "So the puppet master goes free to maim and kill again." cracked me up
6:25 you can argue that Harry can have that charge dropped because he stated that he told Marv not to clog the sinks, however, he did not make any attempts to stop it besides telling him no, which may make the charge stick
If an 8 year old kid shoplifts a toothbrush, he probably really needs it.
Scoobarekt u I’m surprised he didn’t make a shiv with it
I'm fairly confident old man too slow to react probably told the cashier he'd cover it after Kevin left, explaining the situation and apologizing for the inconvenience anyways.
@@madestmadhatter Even if that was the case, Kevin still resisted arrest by running from the cop. It would probably be shrugged off if it was separate incident, but could be also added to his sentence.
Pretty sure that the situation would be dismissed completely. When the store manager found out the kid was mistakenly left at home, he would have shown up with a box of food and various essentials. And then been promptly killed by death traps.
@@Errol_cz Aren't minors considered incompentent? I don't think he'd be charged with resisting arrest
Kevin's main defense: He's 8.
Yeah, even if a prosecutor managed to get him convicted (IF it goes to trial at all, which is very unlikely), he's just going to get probation for a five year maximum.
And under severe mental and emotional strain.
Had this occured in Denmark, the police wouldnt have even been able to arrest him, for that reason.
This. He doesn’t have the mens rea to commit any crime at that age
In my country he wouldnt get sentenced at all since he is a child. Meaning he could even kill without getting sentenced.
Objection: by the time Kevin has retreated to the tree house Harry has made clear he intends to do bodily harm to Kevin through his verbal statements and therefore Kevin is still within his rights to attempt to prevent them pursuing him.
Kevin’s “theft” from Buzz isn’t a case as Kevin is so young, he doesn’t know they forgot him, he thinks he made them disappear with his Christmas wish...therefore it’s not theft, it is “finders keepers” which is totally a legal term 😂
Plus, payback for all Buzz's shit!
Another thing that supports that Kevin was allowed to use deadly traps is that even after the 2 criminals experienced them multiple times they never gave up.
Yes! You should never shoot first ask questions later... But come on if the attacker is SUPER horny on killing you. Then it's a free for all
@@catcrimes80 Phrasing, buddy...
LegalEagle: He has done assault, damage of property, and theft to his sibling.
Well I guess we would all be in jail
god insurance and murder, or is that just me?
Who tf would assault a sibling
Zen Ukko you’re telling me you’ve never, or have never seen someone on a movie or tv show hit their sibling before because they were mad at them?
Sir Shotty nope. Me too
Its very obvious that some people in this thread dont have siblings
Edit: I grew up in an ethnic family of 8 children in a rural town. If you didn't hit back, you were crushed.
I’d actually be curious what the sentence would be after Home Alone 2 because all of the violence happened at Kevin’s uncle’s house, so he wouldn’t be protected by those self-defense laws.
And the bandits also have a gun and are pretty clear that they want to shoot Kevin. Though it is NYC, so the law might be to let them shoot you.
Kevin's attorney could argue that as a guest in his uncle's house, he was covered. He could also argue that he retreated to that location to avoid the escaped felons who were pursuing him out of revenge for the initial incident.
@@MagentaRV but he wasn’t a guest. His uncle is in France while the house is being renovated.
Given it's NY, Kevin would probably get more time than the Sticky Bandits.
@@joshuanash6401 Not only was he not a guest, Kevin doesn't "retreat" back to his Uncle's home. He actively antagonizes the Wet/Sticky Bandits into chasing him to the home.
Objection the bandits put themselves at risk by entering the home after multiple chances to retreat. Kevin’s parents being negligent could also hold him blameless due to mental health issues from the trauma of waking up 8 years old abandoned and being left alone for approximately 3 days. He did retreat and multiple times the bandits continues persuit. Arguably self defense and no longer defense of the home. the bandits persue off the property after multiple chances they could have retreated themselves. The bandits offered absolutely no reason for him to believe they would stop Thier persuit. Also you didn’t mention the severe property damage from flooding the homes: there was 3 feet of water in the basement.
There’s also extreme emotional harm done to a minor.
And terrorizing a minor through threats on his person and life
And assault on a minor
As well as potentially kidnapping considering they hung him off the door and offered no chance for him to leave or run
Dont forget attempted 2nd degree murder once both of them caught up with and captured Kevin. Meaning cutting the rope was a necessity at the moment of cutting it.
I personally don't think Kevin deserves jail, not just because he is a child, but because I have always learned that defending yourself for your safety is always incredibly important.
Not if you live in a Duty to Retreat state.
@@TJ_Low dystopian existnece
Don't think Kevin can even go to juvenile detention at the age of 8 (think it's what, 10 minimum in Illinois?)
There's such a thing as proportional response. The burglers had no intent to kill the child until he did horrible things to them. He could genuinely have called the police to arrive just after they did.
@@seekingabsolution1907The movie mentions that the phone lines were downed by the storm.
Kevin: * breathes *
LegalEagle: this violates the Clean Air Act. Kevin will serve fourteen years in state prison and will be on probation for another five years.
in IL you are probably right
Doesn't hold a candle to Home Alone 2, where he's not even defending his home. He lures the Wet Bandits into a Saw style murder warehouse he sets up while on vacation!
They call themselves "the sticky bandits" in the second movie.
GoneZombie doesn’t Kevin also drop a brick from super high up onto a bandit there? You know one of those things that, if they fall onto your head will probably kill you. One of those things so heavy that construction workers need to wear helmets, specifically so one of those doesn’t fall onto them an kill them?
That was just straight up attempted murder.
@@frankwest5388 he doesn't just drop one brick. He drops several.
Username445 Kevin McCallister started as a resourceful precocious child who defends his home on Christmas Eve graduating to a murderous, torturous, cold-blooded anti-hero in the sequel.
1.4 Bricks to Marv’s face
2. Marv gets stapled in the ass
3. Marv gets stapled in the balls and face
4. Harry slips off the fire escape landing on his neck
5. Marv falls face-first into the basement
6. Harry gets a case of heavy hand tools dumped on his head
7. Marv slips in the Monster Sap and slides into the shelves of paint, knocking over the whole shelf set on him
8. Marv gets electrocuted by the washtub
9. Harry’s head is set on fire and he attempts to douse it in the toilet filled with gasoline
10. Marv has a heavy bag of flour fall onto his head
11. Harry climbs up a partially disconnected ladder, falling face-first and crushing his fingers
12. Marv and Harry get hit by a sevenweight on the staircase send them flying in the air all the way back to the basement, before Kevin cuts it down and it falls onto their chests.
13. Harry and Marv get crushed up against the wall by a toolchest falling down from the top staircase.
14. Kevin lights the kerosene-soaked rope Harry and Marv are using to climb down from the third story causing them to fall all the way down to the concrete, catapulting wood varnish and/or varnish remover to come raining down upon them both.
Kevin was acting in self defense because they intended to kill him, not to mention the fact that he's 8 and alone. What was he supposed to do?
Hide and call 911...according to all local law enforcement. As if you start to dial 911 and the intruders stand by and wait for further instructions.
@@jamesordwayultralightpilot Because a 8 year old has the initiative to think like that or even understand the concept of Police and that you can do that. I must remind you, the parent should always be accompanying a child for a reason and neither do we give them any ability to make informed choices until at least 16 (again for obvious reasons). I'd accept that in regards to someone mature say a 25 year old did this whole ordeal and who would already have the capacity to make informed decisions and general awareness of the law and consequences. But not someone who hasn't even hit 10. It's considerably lucky for the family's sake that he even did as well as he did without them. Realistic circumstances they probably would hide anyway but can't say that for everyone.
@Emily do you have anything important to add? Or do you just like extrapolating the obvious to make yourself sound smart? I feel like my comment arose something inside of you to try and make a point. A point you failed to make, and you didn't even respond to what I said, so you didn't even make a good reply. I was simply saying that calling 911 does nothing to ensure your safety while your home is being invaded. And that Kevin reacted the only way he could if he wanted to live through this ordeal. 911 is a joke, for anyone who thinks 911 will save you from an assailant, it won't.
@@jamesordwayultralightpilot He did call 911. He just needed to catch them in the right place so they wouldn’t run.
@@emily1 I think a child calling the cops would make more sense then trying to murder them in the most insane ways
When Kevin goes to the treehouse, A) he’s still on the property, and B) Marv and Harry appear to still be trying to catch him and cause him harm.
Yep. "Duty to flee" only applies if you're not being actively pursued anymore (i.e., you've successfully escaped). If you are still being actively followed with an intent to harm, that still falls under self-defense regardless of where you are.
Objection:
The bandit dressed as a police officer making Kevin feel like he couldn’t quite trust them in that manner.
that and he stole a toothbrush and thought he'd be arrested if he called police.
objection: the only ones who could testify to that are Kevin and the wet bandits. Neither party could reasonably be trusted to give objective testimony.
The theory that Kevin's dad is involved with the mafia is my favorite
I saw that. I think it's a stretch.
@@LegalEagle assuming his dad is involved with the mafia, would that mean Kevin's whole family would be arrested since they know where the money comes from?
@@connorhilchie2779 It would depend on his level of involvement and their knowledge. Like if his wife knows he goes around extorting or killing, she could face charges, but it would be hard since she could just say she didn't know and refuse to testify.
Couldn't he be a successful doctor or business owner?
If he was Harry and Marv would’ve left the house well alone lol
As a non-lawyer, I think that kevin could argue that he only modified his house, and that it just so happened that the bandits injured themselves on said modifications.
Except that the “battle plan” document he drew up that shows his intent.
Kevin, "having acquired a taste for blood"… I'M DYING
Isn't the treehouse, which stands on Kevin's parents property still considered his home?
Probably.
In texas castle law covers property and car so in texas he could still essentially shoot them on the rope do to fear for his life.
Yes it’s part of the property.
It varies from State to State. In one state it is your responsibility to shoot a trespasser and in other you should remove your pants and bend over
Yes, & they were still chasing after him, so he is definitely covered legally under the castle law. Lol. If you retreat & they come after you, then you can use appropriate force. The idea behind retreating is that people don't kill someone when they could have walked away from the situation. Hate to say it, but LE was wrong on several points made in this video.
Objection: you mentioned that deadly force is allowed in an attempt to prevent felonies. If the wet bandits are attempting to commit a felony then Kevin has the right to use deadly force.
Also, Kevin has no reason to assume that people who would break into his house knowing that he is there would not do him harm, bodily or otherwise. On top of that Kevin is eight years old, no judge or jury is going to try a child for defending himself, maybe Texas.
@@pittland44 especially not Texas, stand your ground laws are very strong here
@@pittland44 Florida
@@pittland44 They might. Also, he wasn’t about to be harmed so it technically isn’t self defense.
@@viktornapolitano6113 These men were breaking into his home armed with crowbars and shouted "I'm gonna kill that kid!" several times throughout the third act.
I love how he starts by saying that pointing out the crimes ruin the movie nostalgia for us. BRO THATS WHAT MAKES IT SO MUCH BETTER!
Lawyer: maybe next time don't leave your kid at home...
Parents: *Set up the scene for home alone 2*
Judge: Take away all their kids...
To be fair, they didn't leave him _at home_ in the second movie. :P
@@hd_inmemoriam Exactly-He got separated while looking for batteries for his Talkboy recorder and started following some guy who looked like his dad from behind
@@hd_inmemoriam they lost him at the airport and he flew to a whole another place alone... that better? i think it's worse
@@hd_inmemoriam it is kinda their fault for not counting the heads to make sure everyone got on the plane and also partly Kevin’s for stopping knowing they were late.... but mainly the people working on the plane because if they saw the ticket the boy had then we wouldn’t have had these issues again
to this day, I wonder why they didn't just call a good friend asking them to check in on Kevin ... at least. I mean I'd assume they have some friends there. They have like a dozen kids. Surely they know some person or other who they could ask to go over and babysit him for a night...
Please do a legal analysis of the movie "Knives Out". I would really appreciate it.
This is the greatest idea I've ever seen
Yes
I did one already. Ransom is convicted for around 20-30 or maybe a life sentence, Marta is about 10 years down the hole, and Walt is charged with at least five years, if not more.
Yes that be a good one!
For some reason I thought you meant Ready or Not lmao
Lol "Laws Broken: Santa Clause" should be next
THE Santa Clause?
@@godmagnus yup, where putting on a dead man's suit locks you into lifelong servitude.
MattyMag he can back out at anytime though, that’s the whole plot of the third movie
What, you never heard of the legal precedent 'you kill it, you bought it'?
I HATED the Santa Clause!
It’s been years since I saw the movie, I can’t imagine Kevin would go to prison, he’s a minor and imagine the publicity. And real criminals were involved and the abandonment issue.
Remember the pissed off judge in “What’s Up Doc”? Can you imagine someone like him trying to unravel it all?
"What kind of mother am I?"
An objectively bad one.
One that has trouble finding one of the thousands of Ob/Gyn doctors that would tell her to stop after the eighth. Or the ninth. Or the tenth. Or the-
@@hauntedshadowslegacy2826 Except those weren't all her kids, some of them were Kevin's cousins like that other kid who wets the bed a lot.
@@meganparrish807Great point, her husband and her were only responsible of Kevin and his older brother, the cousins were responsibility of their respective parents.
CinemaSins
I think she's just over worked and clearly her entire family (or are they all in laws?) are monsters that do not care about each other. My parents forgot me lots of places. It happens. And yes, getting yelled at for something you sibling did is also normal. Sucks, but happens.
"Where an attorney destroys your favorite childhood movies"
I'm fine with this, it had to be someone. I might as well learn a little as it happens
Agrerded
"Everything is Illegal"
- Legal Eagle, 2019
There’s hundreds of thousands of laws. What does that tell you? The government is literally shoving it in your face and telling you that they are trying to make you into a criminal, it’s all a trap.
well i was bummed that lighting firecrackers in a pot inside your own house was somehow illegal in illinois. mark that off my list of states to ever live in.
@@johnnyapplesmith and funny how school don't have mandatory law classes.
@@misakamikoto8785 Yeah they just send us cops once a year to tell us how drugs are bad lmao.
You need to make a video of the second Home Alone film. Here’s some of the crimes that Kevin, his parents and the Wet Bandits committed:
Kevin- Stole his father’s cash and credit card via accident because he’s looking for batteries for his Talkboy. Committed credit card fraud for a hotel room. Destroyed a window of a toy store in order to stop a robbery committed by the Wet Bandits. Trespassed in a house under remodeling and construction left by his uncle and aunt. Even pinched a woman’s buttocks, so she can punch the Wet Bandits.
Kevin’s parents- the same you said in this video.
Wet Bandits- Escape from prison, robbery, owning a firearm. It’s illegal to own a firearm as a felon since Harry and Marv are felons. kidnapping, even attempted murder.
This channel has taught me that if someone ever tries to hurt me or break into my home I will be going to jail for a longer time than the attacker/burglar, because I’m not leaving my own home.
?
Even worse. He didn't get into civil liability. In real life, burglars have sued homeowners when they got hurt inside the house. And they've won their cases, sometimes.
@@TheRealScooterGuythat is a sad tragedy
@TheRealScooterGuy WTF have our world come to?!
Also I don't think he could call the police until the very end. An important plot point was the phone lines were down. When they left for the airport the repair person told the family it would take a few days to fix them. That's why Kevin's parents couldn't call him from Paris. At the very end he managed to call 911, but I don't think he could call them before that and tell them he saw burglars stalking his house and overhead them saying the were coming back that night.
"To add insult to injury, the heartless bastard then taunts Buzz's girlfriend." Ahahaha!
We could also add that Harry was driving the van when he almost hit Kevin. He could have received a citation and/or charges to reckless operation of a motor vehicle and potentially be charged with vehicular manslaughter had Kevin got hit.
"To add insult to injury this heartless b*tch insults his girlfriend" haha omg that gave me a good laugh
Was that his girlfriend? I thought it was a stray dog he found on the street.
if i remember right, i think they originally used a dude in a wig for that picture.
because the movie director didnt want to shame some girl forever in a kids family movie.
"Devin Ratray told Yahoo;
“They decided it would be unkind to put a girl in that role of just being funny-looking. The art director had a son who was more than willing to volunteer for the part. I think if he had known it would become the highest-grossing family comedy of all time, he might have had second thoughts about it.”
so, technically, thats a trans couple in 1990, considering kevin calls him a she, respecting her pronouns, if not her beauty. 💋
Objection: the tree house was still on the property, therefore the zip line cutting incident still falls under castle law
Also the crooks were still actually chasing him.
Sapphire Clawe I was just saying that.
@@davidwallace7543 Sorry. But still. This lawyer is acting as a prosecutor and overreaching in certain ways. Including the fact that Kevin was still being pursued and therefore he was still in danger, the treehouse was still on Mccallister property, and the fact that Kevin actually shouldn't be tried at all at 8, means that there are problems with his issue. If anything, the parents should be charged with anything that Kevin would actually get charged with due to him learning these things as a result of their parenting. On a side note, someone get those parents a condom or 7.
Agreed
how is an 8 yr old given a "duty to retreat" when their are no neighbors, no money for a place to stay, and finally cant trust police due to Marv?
Kevin, a minor, did all this in self defense yet it was still wrong? What’s he supposed to do? Throw pillows at them and nicely ask them to leave?
Correct if someone tries to murder u all ur allowed to do is tell them to stop and hope they listen 🤷♀️
Call the police and/or leave.
@@Blinks77 Bro some one tryna kill me they just gonna sit on the couch and wait for the police to come
Call the police
@@toastedbread105 fr these people think the police comes instantly
Are you going to do Home Alone 2? I really would love to see you evaluate that one too since more damage/harm is done in that one. Plus, The same parents possibly charged a second time? Not to mention Kevin is not home, but inside a hotel in New York where his victims were, besides the Sticky Bandits, some of the hotel employees.
Objection on the cutting the rope: Kevin McAllister attempted retreat against two dedicated pursuers who he had attempted to dissuade pursuit of on multiple instances through various non-lethal and lethal means. As part of his retreat, he cut the rope that would be used to pursue him. That they happened to be on the rope is not inherently part of his responsibility and indeed proves that he was correct in assuming that his attempted retreat did not dissuade them. His assumptions are further justified in that his continued retreat did not prevent his assailants from eventually catching up to him and uttering multiple threats that a jury separately concluded amounted to attempted second degree murder. In other words, his actions could reasonably amount to reasonable force in self-defense as part of complying with his duty to retreat.
That they were attempting to return to the house at the time and he could've waited for them to return is heresay and may be difficult to prove in court
Actually, as far as I know, the tree house he retreats to is still private property, and he only cuts the rope once they attempt to once again follow him further into his property. Therefore, I believe in conjunction with your statement, the castle laws would still apply.
He waited until they were midway across for the sole sake of causing them to fall, and preventing retreat
@@princepartee725 exactly. it was still thier land just the back yard.
plus the rope to his treehouse is still his family's property
@@matthewpoff2077 they would have to prove that they we're halfway in court, somewhat hard to do as it's their word against that of a child they were attacking
You: Home alone
Me, an intellectual: Kids' Die Hard
I lol'ed. Great meme use.
@@LegalEagle do the Jim Carry Grinch . Laws brocken other then stealing Christmas . Like Male tampering
I think John Hughes was inspired to write what he described as "Straw Dogs for Kids"
@@osmosisjones4912 i think he'd have to get deeper into the whoville law system, which is a tiny city on a snowflake. very complicated.
I would think that cutting Harry and Marv off the zipline would still be considered self defense due to the common law concept of curtilage (if I'm spelling that correctly). The Home isn't just the house, but a kind of nebulously defined area surrounding the home that is kind of conceptual. But the treehouse could be considered an extension of the home itself, into which he was driven. If, for instance, I were driven from my house and am driven to a tool shed, the totality of the circumstance might still allow the castle doctrine to apply if I use the hedge trimmers as a lethal weapon against my attackers. The same can be said of the treehouse.
Castle Law: includes the entire property
The kid could've shot them out of a neighbor's house and it'd still be a justified engagement.