Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 197

Thread: CA - 911 call of man that shot and killed 2 people that were burglarizing the house next door

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Bend, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    107

    Post imported post

    I am amazed that the 911 operator tries to tell this caller to just be a sheep and stay in his house.

    I would certainly want my neighbor to react this way if I was burglarized (and they would).

    Link to 911 call audio:

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f3d_1195171937

    Nov. 15, 2007 Pasadena
    BOOM YOU'RE DEAD
    A Pasadena homeowner this afternoon fatally shot two men he believed were burglarizing his neighbor's house, police said.

    About 2 p.m., the homeowner in the Village Grove East subdivision heard noises he thought sounded like broken glass, said Capt. A.H. "Bud" Corbett, with the Pasadena Police Department. The man determined the noise was coming from next door.

    The man, who police have not identified, knew the owner of the house in the 7400 block of Timberline Drive was not home, and that the noise could possibly be a burglary, Corbett said. The man then called police to inform them he thought his neighbor's house was being burglarized.

    The man then saw two men coming through a gate in the backyard of the neighbor's house.

    "He confronted them with a shotgun," Corbett said, and asked them to stop. They did not and he fired two shots, striking each man once, Corbett said.

    One man was found dead about two houses from where the reported burglary occurred. The other was found dead across the street, Corbett said.

    Police are interviewing the homeowner.

    A window in the back of the neighbor's house was broken

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Forest, VA USA, ,
    Posts
    77

    Post imported post

    Damn! As much as I want to agree with what he did. I think he is screwed!

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Bend, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    107

    Post imported post

    I agree the legality of the shooting is going to come into question. I think his only hope is where he says they were coming in the yard towards him and he didn't know what to do.

    The thing that amazed me is the 911 operator telling him not to defend himself and his neighborhood.

    It does sound like it goes from "Move and you're dead," to boom pretty much instantly. Of course not being able to have seen the event this is just pure speculation as to what was happening.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Centennial, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,412

    Post imported post

    He is rightfully screwed on this one. He had no responsibility (legaly or moraly) to use deadly force to defend his neighbors property. The comments he made about them coming into his yard will probably not help him. 1, he didn't sound that sincere about them being in his yard. The tone of his voice and his previous statements make it sound like he was just trying to defend his actions. 2 He went after them after being advised not to. At the time he left his house, he was in no danger. If they HAD come to his house he would have a case, but running after them while they were leaving someone elses house was stupid.
    Unfortunatly, it seems what we have here is what the anti's are afraid of, a guy who realy want's to shoot someone, and was just waiting for the chance to do so.
    The bad part about this is the image it reflects on the rest of us. The morning show I listen to dovetailed this right into a sarcastic "yeah, all we need is more guns in the world" rant. I pretty much agree with the rest of their ideas, but their gun policy is about 180 degrees off of mine, and this incedent played right into their hands. How hard is it going to be to convince people that letting people be armed is a good thing after this? the whole thing sucks.

    Edit:
    "They are getting away"
    "I can't see where they went, I'm going out"
    "One of them is in the yard over there, the other one is running down the street"

    Seems like they were leaving the scene, with officers on the way (they showed up immediatly after he shot them). He honestly had no reason to chase them down and kill them over someone elses property.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    269

    Post imported post

    It depends on what state he's in, but it was probably legal for him to attempt to aprehend them, and if they really did make threatening movements then it was not 'killing over property.' The fact that they haven't released his name yet means he probably won't be changed, and he wasn't arrested on the spot either.

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    It does depend what state he was in, whether or not his actions were legal.

    He did not make things better for himself by discussing this on the phone.

    Furthermore, I understand that it can be frustrating to have someone tell you not to defend yourself, however these are dispatchers, and probably not sworn personell, nor lawyers. If they were to advise someone TO USE lethal force, or force at all, they could be sued and be in a mountain of crap. I am sure it is policy to tell anyone not to use force.

    If the dispatch said, sure go out and shoot them, its legal, he would be long gone.

  7. #7
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,732

    Post imported post

    This won't fly in OHIO. Ohio does not have the castle doctrine.

    However, if the state prosecutes and the jury acquits, would not that be a strong message to the anti gun nuts.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    The story wrote:
    One man was found dead about two houses from where the reported burglary occurred. The other was found dead across the street, Corbett said.
    Damn, did the guy use an 8-gauge or something?

    :shock:

  9. #9
    Regular Member IanB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    1,896

    Post imported post

    This happened in Pasadena Tx.

  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    The story wrote:
    One man was found dead about two houses from where the reported burglary occurred. The other was found dead across the street, Corbett said.
    Damn, did the guy use an 8-gauge or something?

    :shock:
    Uhhh wouldn't an 8 gauge do MORE damage than a 12, seeing as how it is bigger??

    I don't think it's a good strategy to shoot and not kill, though. If I was forced to shoot someone, it's more than likely to stop them from using a weapon to hurt or kill me. If I shoot the guy and only wound him, he can probably still use that weapon, so I would continue to shoot until he stopped moving.

  11. #11
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    imperialism2024 wrote:
    The story wrote:
    One man was found dead about two houses from where the reported burglary occurred. The other was found dead across the street, Corbett said.
    Damn, did the guy use an 8-gauge or something?

    :shock:
    Uhhh wouldn't an 8 gauge do MORE damage than a 12, seeing as how it is bigger??

    I don't think it's a good strategy to shoot and not kill, though. If I was forced to shoot someone, it's more than likely to stop them from using a weapon to hurt or kill me. If I shoot the guy and only wound him, he can probably still use that weapon, so I would continue to shoot until he stopped moving.
    Hmm, I don't think it would be a bad strategy to aim to kill someone, however, if you hit them and they don't die, and they release their weapon, I don't think its a wise strategy to kill them just because they are still moving.

  12. #12
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    openryan wrote:
    Hmm, I don't think it would be a bad strategy to aim to kill someone, however, if you hit them and they don't die, and they release their weapon, I don't think its a wise strategy to kill them just because they are still moving.
    Well I look at it this way: If he's holding a weapon and I'm threatened enough to shoot him, I'm gonna shoot 2 or 3 times before he has a chance to drop the weapon. At that point of course I'm going to assess the situation, and if his weapon is dropped I'm not gonna keep shooting. Ya never know if they've got a BUG, though, and they've already shown intent to hurt or kill you, so I would keep them at gun point until it was very clear that they weren't gonna do any damage.

    So if I put myself in this guy's shoes, and I had a shotgun and two guys that I felt threatened by, I'd probably either give them each a shell or throw one in the middle if they're close enough to get them both before I give them each their own. Keep in mind, though, I'd only do this if I knew they had weapons and I felt that was the only way to keep myself from getting hurt or killed. I sure as heck wouldn't shoot once or twice and give them enough time to run away...if they had enough time to turn and run, they could have easily pulled a gun out and shot me. Ya know?

    Does that make more sense? lol

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Centennial, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,412

    Post imported post

    color of law wrote:
    This won't fly in OHIO. Ohio does not have the castle doctrine.

    However, if the state prosecutes and the jury acquits, would not that be a strong message to the anti gun nuts.
    I don't know of any castle doctrine that applies to your neighbors, especially if you hardly know them

    openryan wrote:
    Hmm, I don't think it would be a bad strategy to aim to kill someone, however, if you hit them and they don't die, and they release their weapon, I don't think its a wise strategy to kill them just because they are still moving.
    If they are unarmed and wounded then they are unlikely to be a deadly threat. Killing that person would likely be murder (and rightfully so).

  14. #14
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    openryan wrote:
    Hmm, I don't think it would be a bad strategy to aim to kill someone, however, if you hit them and they don't die, and they release their weapon, I don't think its a wise strategy to kill them just because they are still moving.
    Well I look at it this way: If he's holding a weapon and I'm threatened enough to shoot him, I'm gonna shoot 2 or 3 times before he has a chance to drop the weapon. At that point of course I'm going to assess the situation, and if his weapon is dropped I'm not gonna keep shooting. Ya never know if they've got a BUG, though, and they've already shown intent to hurt or kill you, so I would keep them at gun point until it was very clear that they weren't gonna do any damage.

    So if I put myself in this guy's shoes, and I had a shotgun and two guys that I felt threatened by. I'd probably either give them each a shell or throw one in the middle if they're close enough to get them both before I gave them each their own. Keep in mind, though, I'd only do this if I knew they had weapons and I felt that was the only way to keep myself from getting hurt or killed. I sure as heck wouldn't shoot once or twice and give them enough time to run away...if they had enough time to turn and run, they could have easily pulled a gun out and shot me. Ya know?

    Does that make more sense? lol
    Yes, that makes much more sense!

    This guy however should not have went outside. I do realize that he was good friends with the neighbors, and that their property was being stolen right before his eyes, however there were better ways to go about this.

    He could have stayed in the house, with his firearm, and made sure they did not break into HIS residence. Granted if it was legal in his state, then thats fine, however I wouldn't want to try his case before a jury, since even though its legal, he put himself into the hands of danger for something that was not even his. I think it could hold up in court if it was legal, but would be hard.

    The other option, if he was intent on these guys being caught, would be to get in the car (assuming he had a cell phone) call police and pursue them at a safe distance until the police caught up. On the tape police arrived only seconds after the man shot them, they would have been either apprehended or shot by police anyway.

    It is too bad it happened this way, the guy sounded a bit looney on the phone, as he tried to prove his legality to the dispatcher too much, however he seemed legitimately concerned. I suppose his anger blurred his judgement.

  15. #15
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    Yyyeah I'm not gonna say what he did was right, nor will I say he was wrong. I think the moral of this story is you shouldn't rob someone's house .

  16. #16
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    Yyyeah I'm not gonna say what he did was right, nor will I say he was wrong. I think the moral of this story is you shouldn't rob someone's house .
    At least in a state with a Stand Your Ground law if the neighbors are home!

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

    Post imported post

    No NAU wrote:
    I am amazed that the 911 operator tries to tell this caller to just be a sheep and stay in his house.

    I would certainly want my neighbor to react this way if I was burglarized (and they would).

    Link to 911 call audio:

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f3d_1195171937

    Nov. 15, 2007 Pasadena
    BOOM YOU'RE DEAD
    A Pasadena homeowner this afternoon fatally shot two men he believed were burglarizing his neighbor's house, police said.
    Is that for real? Does that fool not understand english?

    Unless those batos attacked Joe Horn with a weapon (even a stapler), heis a majorgoof with a gun. Utter and pathetic lack of sound judgment.

    Now, the costs start piling up. Monetary, psychic, societal and familial. He gets to pay the bill.

    On a postive note, that dispatcher was cool and uber-professional. He did a perfect job.

    I bet he cried.

  18. #18
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    The call was a good example of "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away."

    Legally, he probably would have been better off to hang up after making the call rather than letting it all get recorded. I could see him getting prosecuted, but the DA ought to consider whether the greater good would be served by prosecuting this man and discouraging citizen action, or by keeping would-be burglars guessing whether the house they're breaking into might have somebody present or nearbywho is armed and willing to confront them.
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    West Valley, Utah, USA
    Posts
    93

    Post imported post

    Perhaps if he had hung up after telling them that he was armed and would protect himself the police might have showed up a little quicker.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    Yes, in TX itIS legal to use deadly force to protect personal property...at night. That's the real way to deal with crime.

    I hope the guy walks, or if he goes to trial, no TX jury will find him guilty.

    There should be no law against looking outfor your neighbors...their property included.

    He's definitely my kind of "good neighbor."

    -- John D.

    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  21. #21
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    Shotgun wrote:
    The call was a good example of "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away."

    Legally, he probably would have been better off to hang up after making the call rather than letting it all get recorded. I could see him getting prosecuted, but the DA ought to consider whether the greater good would be served by prosecuting this man and discouraging citizen action, or by keeping would-be burglars guessing whether the house they're breaking into might have somebody present or nearbywho is armed and willing to confront them.
    FALSE -- the police arrived right when they were escaping, had the guy not shot them, they probably would have ran right into the police car.

    This man KNEW Police were on the way, and close. He sounded like he had a very itchy trigger finger, even if it was legal.

    If it is legal, and the police are coming, and I am not in IMMEDIATE danger, I will let the police handle it and keep my behind out of a courtroom or even a chance of being in one.

    I don't think this guy would have handled teepee-er any differently, I think he just wanted to shoot somebody. He sounded genuinely concerned to me at first, but I played it again. There was almost no verbal warning before shots were fired.

    I am willing to bet he shot the one, and the other immediately ran, but he shot him anyway "because they were stealing, and its wrong".

    I do think he will at LEAST catch some heat for shooting someone who retreated.

  22. #22
    Regular Member MetalChris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SW Ohio
    Posts
    1,215

    Post imported post

    Is this really the correct forum for this story? I fail to see how this was self defense in any sense of the term...

    The guy is going down, and rightfully so. Make the "sheeple" argument all you want guys, but he had no business going out his front door. Now if the thieves had kidnapped his neighbor or something like that, he'd have justification, but from what we all heard, he certainly shouldn't have left his home.

  23. #23
    Regular Member IanB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    1,896

    Post imported post

    USAF_MetalChris wrote:
    Is this really the correct forum for this story? I fail to see how this was self defense in any sense of the term...

    The guy is going down, and rightfully so. Make the "sheeple" argument all you want guys, but he had no business going out his front door. Now if the thieves had kidnapped his neighbor or something like that, he'd have justification, but from what we all heard, he certainly shouldn't have left his home.
    Agreed. This guy is a tool, and he's going to the grey bar hotel.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    imperialism2024 wrote:
    The story wrote:
    One man was found dead about two houses from where the reported burglary occurred. The other was found dead across the street, Corbett said.
    Damn, did the guy use an 8-gauge or something?

    :shock:
    Uhhh wouldn't an 8 gauge do MORE damage than a 12, seeing as how it is bigger??
    Oh, I was making reference to perhaps how the shotgun impact was enough to blow the guys many feet from where they were standing when they were shot, even though that's not physically possible.

    Anyhow, I can see either side... Given the details, it doesn't sound like an instance where I would shoot, but I can understand why someone might consider it.

  25. #25
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?se...amp;id=5538780 another article on this incident. The article pants a slightly different picture. Somehow the article linked in the OP is missing audio (1:45 in this article's audio) where Mr. Horn states that the burglars were armed with a crowbar (which they used to break in). The article also mentions 3 shots (as opposed to 2 in the OP article). Three shots are clearly audible on the recording.

    I think Mr. Horn was well within his right to try to arrest these guys. Armed or not, I can believe these thieves might have thought they could take down a 70-yr-old man.

    The thing that bothers me the most: almost 8 seconds between the 2nd & 3rd shot (shots 1 & 2 were fired within 1 second of each other). here may be witnesses to the third shot (neighbors getting to their windows after hearing the first 2 shots). I wonder what happened in that 8 seconds: was burglar #2 running away at a dead sprint with Mr Horn giving chase? Or maybe #2 was ducking behind a corner fumbling in his waste band for a weapon?

    I know we don't yet have the details to answer this last question. Hopefully another neighbor or passerby heard the first two shots and looked outside to witness the encounter.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

Page 1 of 8 123 ... 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
  •