Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Suspected Burglar Killed By Homeowner in Roanoke

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    27

    Suspected Burglar Killed By Homeowner in Roanoke

    http://www.wset.com/story/15093629/s...medium=twitter

    It looks like this is a pretty clear cut case for once.

  2. #2
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217
    I wonder how the burglar was injured.

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Not really a lot of details. The article doesn't even say what caused the injuries. Was he beat up or shot? Either way, it seems the police believe it was a justified response. Not sure it's a clear cut case with only these few details.
    Last edited by thebigsd; 07-17-2011 at 12:05 AM.
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,182
    Not much more info in this article:
    http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/293235

    Looks like an 'occupied home invasion'. They seem to be happening more and more all across the country.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    South Chesterfield, VA
    Posts
    315
    Anyone else find it annoying that they lump the intruders death in as "The eighth homicide this year"?

  6. #6
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    That's weird... the URL of the TV station story has "shot" embedded in the address, yet the text of the story does not say "shot". I guess we citizen readers must be too stupid to notice the URL...

    TFred

  7. #7
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by builtjeep View Post
    Anyone else find it annoying that they lump the intruders death in as "The eighth homicide this year"?
    Well it apparently was a homicide, but judging from the limited amount of information in the article, it appears that it will be ruled excusable. Still the press, in all of their radiant self-anointed glory, can be trusted to paint an excusable homicide without using the word "excusable" in order to further their disdain of armed citizens.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  8. #8
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    Well it apparently was a homicide, but judging from the limited amount of information in the article, it appears that it will be ruled excusable. Still the press, in all of their radiant self-anointed glory, can be trusted to paint an excusable homicide without using the word "excusable" in order to further their disdain of armed citizens.
    That's a stretch.

    C'mon, it's clear that it was/is a homicide. So that's what they report.

    Hard to report it an "excusable" homicide until it's ruled that way.

    How would you have written the report, SB?
    Last edited by HankT; 07-19-2011 at 11:17 PM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Centreville
    Posts
    147
    Lots of speculation off of a 104 word article.

    C'mon, it's clear that it was/is a homicide. So that's what they report.
    Guilty until proven innocent, right Hank?

  10. #10
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217
    Quote Originally Posted by epilogue View Post
    Lots of speculation off of a 104 word article.



    Guilty until proven innocent, right Hank?


    Huh?

    "Guilty" of what? Who is "guilty," epi?

  11. #11
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by HankT View Post
    That's a stretch.

    C'mon, it's clear that it was/is a homicide. So that's what they report.

    Hard to report it an "excusable" homicide until it's ruled that way.

    How would you have written the report, SB?
    You will note, sir, that I clearly said "appears" as per the link's information. Yes, it certainly does appear to have been a homicide, but until all of the investigative data is gathered and examined, we can't even say that, now can we? The gist of my point was how the press tends to paint these things.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,201
    Homicide is merely the killing of one person by another. That appears to be what has happened in Roanoke. Whether it is a legally justified or a legally criminal action has no bearing whether the action was a homicide.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Eastern Prince William Co. VA, ,
    Posts
    306

    Burglery vs. Robbery

    Burglery implies it is not a crime against a person, only property; and lethal force is not justified.

    If when confronted, the burgler threated the "confrontor" making him fear for his safety, then lethal force would be justified.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Centreville
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by HankT View Post
    Huh?

    "Guilty" of what? Who is "guilty," epi?
    I both miss-read and miss-interpreted, I apologize.

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,201
    Quote Originally Posted by rugerdon View Post
    Burglery implies it is not a crime against a person, only property; and lethal force is not justified.

    If when confronted, the burgler threated the "confrontor" making him fear for his safety, then lethal force would be justified.
    I'm guessing you haven't been to one of user's Lethal Force Seminar's eh? There are two types of burglary as provided for in Virginia law: The English Common Law form and the Code of Virginia statutory form. During the night when a burglar enters your home the Common Law definition of burglary applies and you most certainly may justifiably use lethal force against one who enters the home under cover of darkness, because it is expected that people are within the homeplace and the burglar would be expected to assume that he/she is entering an occupied dwelling to commit whatever crime he/she is about to commit. Under these circumstances it is reasonable to assume that that burglar intends grave harm to those occupying the dwelling at night. The Common Law version of burglary does not include one who breaks into a home during the day, since it assumes that those who would occupy the home are gone, off working or tending to things elsewhere and the trespassor would be entering the home without intent to cause harm to the individual. Under this circumstance the Common Law assumes the person is at best a trespassor and potentially could be considered worse if he/she has damaged the property to gain entrance. Thus the use of lethal force is not justified for a mere trespassor.

    However, under the codified version of burglary, lethal force is authorized, even during the daytime. However, a trespassor is not considered a burglar unless that trespassor, trespasses with the intent to commit a felony, or poses a reasonable, imminent, credible threat of grave harm to your health or threat of death. Only under this circumstance may lethal force be justifiably used to repel someone who has entered your home during the daytime.

    I am not an attorney, I am not your attorney, however this is my recollection of the law with regard to burglary and nothing more as presented by "user" here on this forum.
    Last edited by jmelvin; 07-24-2011 at 05:43 PM.

Posting Permissions

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