Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30

Thread: Man Accused Of Shooting Alleged Sacramento Car Thief

  1. #1
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17952308/





    Man Accused Of Shooting Alleged Sacramento Car Thief

    theKCRAchannel.com
    3:14 p.m. PDT April 4, 2007
    SACRAMENTO, Calif. - A south Sacramento man who told police he was defending his property was arrested early Wednesday after shooting a teenager who was allegedly trying to steal his car, authorities said. Police said 42-year-old Sou Saechin told them he accidentally shot the teen at about 3 a.m. on Rock Creek Way.

    But officials said Saechin went too far in trying to protect his red Honda.

    "What we try to stress to people is that deadly force, the use of a firearm, is never justified under any circumstances to protect property," said Sgt. Matt Young of the Sacramento Police Department.

    Police said Saechin came outside of his home armed with a .22-caliber rifle and confronted three alleged burglars.

    Saechin fired one shot, hitting one of the alleged burglars in the chest. The three fled the scene, police said.

    Saechin's wife said her husband was not trying to kill anyone but only wanted to warn the robbers.

    Saechin was taken to jail on suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon. Bail was set at $30,000.

    The injured teenager was taken to Kaiser Permanente Medical Center for treatment and is expected to survive. Police said they are looking for two other people who were involved in the attempted theft. The men were described as Asian and between 18 and 20 years old.
    The unintended consequence;

    The message police delivered by the arrest of Saechin, tells car thieves, burglars, or anyone commiting a home invasion robbery that they can take what ever they want, so long as they do not represent a physical threat to the victim. If the victim does take action to preserve their property and injures or kills the theif (or theives), the victimis subject to arrest, conviction of a crime,andsusceptable to civil litigation.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Bristow, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    In PG County , MD it is against the law to leave a vehicle unattended and running to prevent theft (a big problem there) . The owner is subject to a citation and fine . It is also illegal to use a gun to prevent your car from being stolen as well . The only party having any rights here is the THEIF ! Sounds like CA is the same .

  3. #3
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Don't ever give a cop a statement greater than, "I fired in self defense, I would like to talk to my lawyer". Period!



    I like how the "reporter" describes the criminal as a "wounded teenager".

  4. #4
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    Saechin probably couldnt resist his human nature, to relay the events as he saw them to anyone listening. You actually need to train youself to excersize your right to remain silent- even when excited or upset.

    I dont know how many times Ive watched some moron on "Cops" get themselves hooked up saying the wrong thing or consenting to an unwarranted search.

    How hard is it to shut up?
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
    Posts
    2,798

    Post imported post

    I like the way comedian Ron White puts it...

    I have the RIGHT to remain silent......just not the ability!!

    Sounds like this guy was the same.




    casullshooter wrote:
    In PG County , MD it is against the law to leave a vehicle unattended and running to prevent theft (a big problem there) . The owner is subject to a citation and fine . It is also illegal to use a gun to prevent your car from being stolen as well . The only party having any rights here is the THEIF ! Sounds like CA is the same .
    OT for a sec....Yeah, MD is very anal aboutrights. Only the Police and Criminals have them!

    That's interesting about the car issue.My 2005 Chrysler 300Chas a factory remote starter and I can start it with the doors locked. Even if anyone broke the window and tried to drive off, as soon as they stepped on the brake to put it in gear or on the gas, without the key, the car shuts off. PERIOD. There's no way to disable or jumper out the system.

    So technically, if I remote start my unattended car and leave it running, I can get a ticket, even though it's PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to steal the car without my key. I've broken the letter of the law, while preserving the spirit of the law.

    Interesting....I'm gonna have to test that one out next time I'm over there!



  6. #6
    Regular Member possumboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,090

    Post imported post

    Speaking of (Prince George)PG county, did you see where the officer was suspended for pointing his gun a realtor that knocked on the wrong door? This was the second time using his gun with no case.

    http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=25&sid=1108271

    "He was released from the county detention center later Friday afternoon on $75,000 bond."

    It is not in this article, but the radio has someone saying that was normal bond for someone with Assault charges. I'm thinking that is BS that this bond was normal! Maybe for Assault! If he was not a LEO, it would be up on a few gun charges also. Including Brandishing, threating with gun, and a few others! But no, the officer making the statement tried to make it sound like he was treated like anyone else would be with this type of complaint.

  7. #7
    Regular Member possumboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,090

    Post imported post

    BobCav wrote:
    That's interesting about the car issue.My 2005 Chrysler 300Chas a factory remote starter and I can start it with the doors locked. Even if anyone broke the window and tried to drive off, as soon as they stepped on the brake to put it in gear or on the gas, without the key, the car shuts off. PERIOD. There's no way to disable or jumper out the system.

    So technically, if I remote start my unattended car and leave it running, I can get a ticket, even though it's PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to steal the car without my key. I've broken the letter of the law, while preserving the spirit of the law.

    Interesting....I'm gonna have to test that one out next time I'm over there!

    I believe the law is more to "save gas and protect the envirnoment" that to keep people from stealing it. I remember learning about this when I lived in the PRoMD.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    possumboy wrote:
    BobCav wrote:
    That's interesting about the car issue.My 2005 Chrysler 300Chas a factory remote starter and I can start it with the doors locked. Even if anyone broke the window and tried to drive off, as soon as they stepped on the brake to put it in gear or on the gas, without the key, the car shuts off. PERIOD. There's no way to disable or jumper out the system.

    So technically, if I remote start my unattended car and leave it running, I can get a ticket, even though it's PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to steal the car without my key. I've broken the letter of the law, while preserving the spirit of the law.

    Interesting....I'm gonna have to test that one out next time I'm over there!

    I believe the law is more to "save gas and protect the envirnoment" that to keep people from stealing it. I remember learning about this when I lived in the PRoMD.
    I remember when it was in the news. The greenies were upset because people were starting their cars in their driveways and letting them warm up on cold winter mornings. But I think that was Montgomery Co., not Punch Guaranteed Co. (PGC).

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spotsylvania County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    700

    Post imported post

    possumboy wrote:
    Speaking of (Prince George)PG county, did you see where the officer was suspended for pointing his gun a realtor that knocked on the wrong door? This was the second time using his gun with no case.
    At least the officer didn't shot and, ultimately, murder someone this time.
    ---

  10. #10
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    possumboy wrote:
    Speaking of (Prince George)PG county, did you see where the officer was suspended for pointing his gun a realtor that knocked on the wrong door? This was the second time using his gun with no case.

    http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=25&sid=1108271

    "He was released from the county detention center later Friday afternoon on $75,000 bond."
    Somebody should take away his badge and his gun. Oh, I see that they did that.

    Assuming he has his own firearm(s), he's now just a regular ole goof with a gun.

    Wonder who his next victim will be?



  11. #11
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    Does anyone want to talk about California?Or Sacramento? Or people protecting property in either of those vicinites?

    Just a thought...
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  12. #12
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Well, I'll comment on the specific case. Looks like a badshoot. Angry and losing his composure, Saechin simply decided that shooting was the solution to everything. So he pops the one thief in the chest and, innovatively,decides to mark the criminal vehicle by shooting at it three times "to let the police know that was the car."

    Saechin, who wasclearly the victim of a burglary/theft, totally mishandled the event. In an effort to protect his $10,000 Civic he has incurred costs that will about equal a new SLK55. Maybe more.

    Figure each of those bullets cost him about $15 K to shoot. Not counting any jail time, of course. Or pain and suffering by him or his family.

    Saechin's fundamental error was that he was not protecting his family. He was protecting a gdHonda Civic. He lost his head. He was out of control.

    As to what kind of message it sends to auto thieves/burglars, if any, I think it would probably be to be more careful. Or maybe to be more prepared for a hothead with a gun.

    BTW, if this Saechin guy was really interested in protecting his family, why is he using a friggin' .22???






  13. #13
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    I still think Saechin's main mistake was giving a statement. I don't really care about the shooting even though based on his own statement it was perhaps not justified or even an accidental discharge.

    One good thing about California law is that a private person can possess arms while making an arrest most anywhere in the state and most certainly while on property lawfully occupied.

    The three criminals could at least havebeen suspected of being in the act of or about to commit afelony (conspiracy, burg. of a locked car, or grand theft at least). So Saechin had every right to be armed.

    Plus when you call the cops for a crime in progress it help to have actually seen someone on your property. You'll get a faster response. If you're only calling about noises then a higher priority call may bump yours.

    If I was investigating a possible property crime in progress on my own property and encountered three suspects, and they did not immediately obey my orders (as a private person lawfully detaining them on suspicion of a crime) I would very quickly be in fear for my life and take appropriate action.

    Being out numbered, and having to look out for a 4th unseensuspect and all the other circumstances that could existetc...help the self-defensecase. If their running away well...let'em run.

    If Saechin had kept his mouth shut a defense atty. would have made a good case for him and perhaps still can.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1

    Post imported post

    "DA Won't Charge Man Who Shot Alleged Thief"

    http://cbs13.com/topstories/local_story_101120715.html

    Here's a quote from the story above, "
    The Sacramento District Attorney's office just released a statement outlining why they are not charging Sou Saechin. According to the D.A., they looked at the case as two separate incidents. The first being the shooting while the burglary was in progress and the second being the shots fired at the fleeing car.

    The DA says that Saechin feared that at least one suspect had a weapon and was about to be attacked when he fired his gun and hit the suspect. The DA says they do not believe a jury would find Saechin acted unlawfully in firing this first shot in self defense.
    "

    It's good to finally hear that they won't be prosecuting him, as far as the criminals are concerned I hope they get more than just a slap on the wrist.

  15. #15
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Nookieaki wrote:
    "DA Won't Charge Man Who Shot Alleged Thief"

    as far as the criminals are concerned I hope they get more than just a slap on the wrist.
    They'll probably get probation/parole, that's the norm unless their "tail"(record) is longer then most.

    But at least one got more than a slap on the wrist, he got shot!

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,043

    Post imported post

    Nookieaki wrote:
    "DA Won't Charge Man Who Shot Alleged Thief"

    http://cbs13.com/topstories/local_story_101120715.html

    Here's a quote from the story above, "
    The Sacramento District Attorney's office just released a statement outlining why they are not charging Sou Saechin. According to the D.A., they looked at the case as two separate incidents. The first being the shooting while the burglary was in progress and the second being the shots fired at the fleeing car.

    The DA says that Saechin feared that at least one suspect had a weapon and was about to be attacked when he fired his gun and hit the suspect. The DA says they do not believe a jury would find Saechin acted unlawfully in firing this first shot in self defense.
    "

    It's good to finally hear that they won't be prosecuting him, as far as the criminals are concerned I hope they get more than just a slap on the wrist.
    I think that it is adequately described why Saechin won't be charged for firing on one of the suspects. However, if the DA investigated the incident as two seperate incidents (as indicated by the article), then they leave out the reason for not charging Saechin for discharging his firearm at a fleeing vehicle.

    Of course, we can go into a ton of what-ifs with any scenerio, but armed only with the information in the articles, I would have opted to cease fire as the suspects and vehicle began to flee.

  17. #17
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    vrwmiller wrote:
    I think that it is adequately described why Saechin won't be charged for firing on one of the suspects. However, if the DA investigated the incident as two seperate incidents (as indicated by the article), then they leave out the reason for not charging Saechin for discharging his firearm at a fleeing vehicle.

    Of course, we can go into a ton of what-ifs with any scenerio, but armed only with the information in the articles, I would have opted to cease fire as the suspects and vehicle began to flee.
    I think Saechin dodged a bullet with regard to part 2.In part 2, he was clearly a goof with a gun.

    He musta had a good lawyer.




  18. #18
    Regular Member PincheOgro1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perris, Ca., California, USA
    Posts
    420

    Post imported post

    outrageous !!!

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cherry Tree (Indiana County), Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,155

    Post imported post

    All the shooter, Mr. Sou Saechin, would have to do would be to refuse to cooperate with the District Attorney's office and insist on a jury trial. Think a jury of his peers would find him guilty? Any decent attorney would get at least one juror to vote otherwise.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Oakley,Ca., , USA
    Posts
    11

    Post imported post

    "PC :197. Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in
    any of the following cases:
    1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a
    felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,
    2. When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person,
    against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or
    surprise, to commit a felony, or against one who manifestly intends
    and endeavors, in a violent, riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter
    the habitation of another for the purpose of offering violence to any
    person therein; or,"

    So does this mean "manifestly intends"has to show
    threat of GBH,even in a "property" crime?

    (I've always thought you had to show threat of "GBH")
    SR

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    SMITHFIELD, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    270

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the informative post.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Luis Obispo, California, USA
    Posts
    289

    Post imported post

    Uh...guys? This post is nearly 3 years old.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Army wrote:
    Uh...guys? This post is nearly 3 years old.


  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    281

    Post imported post

    The right to use deadly force to stop fleeing felon(s) by citizens is still technically on the books. His inability to stop them any other way(since they were leaving in a car)probably saved him from prosecution. It especially helped since there were three crooks and only him.

    The bottom line, only tell the police you were in fear of your safety, you saw the crooks had weapons, and I only want to make further statements after I have spoken to my attorney. At least he was (accidentally) a good shot!

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    642

    Post imported post

    Army wrote:
    Uh...guys? This post is nearly 3 years old.
    yeah, pincheorgo has a tendancy to bring back dead posts. It bumps more recent and more helpful topics down. Last time, he tried to give advise on a case that was 2 years old, plus his advise had already been covered 2 yrs ago.

    Pinche is "that guy"
    When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •