what they dont say is whether they were actually robbing the house!
This is a discussion on Man Shoots Burglars: PASADENA, TX: MERGED within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; http://www.kxan.com/Global/story.asp?S=7361796 Associated Press - November 14, 2007 6:45 PM ET PASADENA, Texas (AP) - Pasadena police say an elderly man today shot and killed two ...
Associated Press - November 14, 2007 6:45 PM ET
PASADENA, Texas (AP) - Pasadena police say an elderly man today shot and killed two men he believed were burglarizing his neighbor's house.
Captain "Bud" Corbett says the man heard noises he thought sounded like broken glass and determined the commotion was happening next door.
The man called police and then saw two men coming through a gate in the backyard of the neighbor's house.
Corbett says the elderly man had a shotgun and confronted the pair -- told them to stop -- and shot them when they refused.
One person was found dead about two houses away. The other was found dead across the street.
Police were interviewing the elderly man.
We all need neighbors like that. Hope everything goes well for the gentleman legally, but considering this happened in Texas, he will probably get a medal.
what they dont say is whether they were actually robbing the house!
Good shooting by the old guy.
"In a case legal experts say may "stretch the limits" of the state's self-defense laws, a Pasadena man shot and killed two suspected burglars during a confrontation as they attempted to flee his neighbor's property Wednesday afternoon.
In the minutes before the fatal shootings, Pasadena police said the man called 911 and reported that he had heard glass breaking next door and saw two men entering the home through a window. Still on the phone with police, the man, believed to be in his 70s, saw the suspects leaving from the back of the home.
"I'm getting my gun and going to stop them," the neighbor told the dispatcher during the 2 p.m. call, according to Vance Mitchell, a spokesman for Pasadena police. "The dispatcher said, 'No, stay inside the house; officers are on the way.'
"Then you hear him rack the shotgun. The next sound the dispatcher heard was a boom. Then there was silence for a couple of seconds and then another boom."
After the shotgun blasts, the telephone line went dead. But the neighbor called police again and told a dispatcher what he had done.
When police arrived moments later, they found two dead men in the 7400 block of Timberline Drive. One was across the street, and the other had collapsed two houses down behind a bank of mailboxes in the Village Grove East subdivision. .............."
Hope it goes good for the good guy.
Les Baer 45
N.R.A. Patron Life Member
It's a never ending battle, isn't it...scumbags deserved it!
Wouldn't do it myself unless I thought they were going to kill me - but anytime a thief / felon is cut down as he commits his crimes I do the banana dance
Back in the old days if you protected your neighbors house you'd be congratulated. Now you just have to watch. I don't think a dead felon is any loss - if he doesn't want to get shot he needs to quit being a criminal - his choice when he chooses crime.
According to 911 they were robbing ths house:
"In the minutes before the fatal shootings, Pasadena police said the man called 911 and reported that he had heard glass breaking next door and saw two men entering the home through a window. Still on the phone with police, the man, believed to be in his 70s, saw the suspects leaving from the back of the home."
That is not known to be fact, it's simply a report of what the old man heard (breaking glass) and what he supposed to be going on as told to 911.
In actuality a number of things could have been going on including bad things, as well as not bad things.
Could have been a crime in progress. Might not have been. There is some missing detail that would be important for judging that clearly.
Unknown is whether the neighbor had arranged with this man to defend his home, or whether these were family members maintaining the place. The thing about an innocent person, too, is that often one won't immediately comply with someone else's commands to do something, since the person is innocent and not concerned about appearances to a stranger. Unknown if the movement was furtive, if the two spoke to the man when confronted, if the two clearly indicated their intention to sidestep the man or whether they merely continued on with their movements briefly (as if they didn't clearly understand they'd been taken to be criminals?), or how quickly the shooting was made after "refusal" to comply.
Imagine stopping two people coming around to the gate of your own home. That's different. You know who should be there. You know if you've invited visitors.
With a neighbor's home, though, I'm thinking about the folks I've seen, from time to time, next door. There are times that I've kept an eye out until I was certain they belonged, but on the instant of first glimpse could not have truly said they were friend or foe.
Tough situation, unless a lot of clear indicators all fell into place. Was likely the case with the responding neighbor, here, but the news report doesn't indicate many of the things he says he witnessed. Though, the above personal witnessing of the pair breaking a window and entering through it seems the strongest evidence, yet, that the two were burglarizing the home. Combined with "refusal" to comply with demands to halt and explain, it's highly likely the neighbor's reports are completely true.'... he had heard glass breaking next door and saw two men entering the home through a window.'
Worth heading over to a neighbor's home and tracking down two intruders while police are known to be inbound? Unknown how quickly police repspond in his town. Sounds like a very risky situation to be in. Imagine things from the responding LEOs' viewpoint, in terms of how they'd know the shotgun-wielding person was GG or BG.
Bingo CCW ^^
This is why it's good to use caution and be reserved in cases like this toward property that is not your own. Things are not always as they might seem or appear.
Myself I have many times gone to friends homes or that of my own neighbors to borrow things from their shed with their prior approval even as they were not home. Most recently 2 weekends ago I borrowed a ladder from a person that is stored in a shed space at the side of their home. I went alone backing my car into the driveway. The homeowner was on vacation out of state but I'd talked to them by phone prior and they said go ahead and grab it the shed will be unlocked.
I arrive on site and am carryign this thing around to my car when their neighbor fromnext door comes down the street walking his dog. I have never seen this person even though I have been to my friends home very many times over the 15 yrs. I've known him and his family (my wife is his daughters best friend).
So the neighbor says "Hello" and I reply same. He eye balled me and then went on about his business and walked to his property. he lingered though with he and his dog both watching me load and tie down the ladder from their yard.
I took off moments later, but not before leaving one of business cards in their front door jamb. I did this for the sake of the neighbor figuring he being nosy might walk over and take a look at what it is I put in the door and see I'm not a burglar.
Had that neighbor though come run up on me like this old man (say I accidentally broke a window while moving this 32' ladder) then there would have been trouble. I was there armed as I usually am and this guys place it's out in the country on a relatively secluded lot. The neighbors lot is across an unpaved private road.
Things are not always they might seem or appear and one has to be cautious and reserved when it comes to as much toward persons on property not your own not doing things that are very obviously unlawful. Even if they are there is still judgement toward calling the police and being a good witness or if there is life, or where lawful livestock in danger, taking action.
- Janq plans to return the ladder this weekend
I was just watching "The Live Desk" on fox news channel. They played the 911 call.
I dont know if the call will be on their website or not.
The Old man may have chosen one of the best states to press the self defense laws. Good luck finding 12 texans who would convict this good guy!
Lex et Libertas — Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis!
"Not only do the people who put their lives on the line to protect the rest of us deserve better, we all deserve better than to have our own security undermined by those who undermine law enforcement." -Thomas Sowell
This was on the front page of the Houston Chronicle. Their website has links to the 9-1-1 call, and the paper printed a transcript with the article. Here are some excerpts I find interesting that might work against him in court.
Operator: Pasadena 9-1-1 what is your emergency?
Caller:Uh, burglars breaking into a house next door.
So here we know that it is not his house being broken into. He is not in immediate danger.
Operator:What's the address there sir?
Caller: 7418. Not my address but next door, OK?
Again, not his house.
Operator: Yes, sir.
Caller: I'm watching.....(interrupted)
Operator:7418 what sir?
Caller: Timberline Drive. Uh, I've got a shotgun. Uh, do you want me to stop 'em?
Operator: Nope. Don't do that. Ain't no property worth shooting somebody over. OK?
Caller: Well, they're breaking in right now. They're over there in the house. I'm watching 'em.
Call taker gets description and callers information
Operator: Do you know that number next door?
Caller: Uh, I don't know if its ascending or descending. But, uh hurry up man. Catch these guys will you? Cause I ain't going to let them go. I'm gonna be honest with you. I'm not going to let them go. I'm not going to let them get away with this.
Maybe talking about detaining them at gun point?
Later he states he does not know if they are armed, but states he knows they used a crowbar to break the window.
A little more conversation about what he can see.
Operator: So, they might slip out the same way. Or, can you see the front of the house?
Caller: I can't see the front. I can go out the house, but if I go out the front I'm bringing my shotgun with me. I swear to God.
Operator: No. No.
Caller: I'm not gong to let them get away with it. I can't take a chance on getting killed over this. Ok? I'm gonna shoot. I'm gonna shoot.
So, he can't take a chance getting killed over this, then why does he seek to confront them? And stating he is going to shoot. What if they surrender?
More conversation with call taker telling the caller not to go outside.
Operator: That's all right. Ain't nobody home that you know of, is there?
Caller: Well, over there I would assume. I hope not.
Operator: Ok, I mean, you know your neighbors?
Caller: Nah, I really don't really know these neighbors. I know the neighbors on the other side really well. I can assure you if had been their house I would've already done something.
So he doesn't really know the people that live there. A little small talk then
Operator: I've got officers coming out there. I don't want you to go outside that house and I don't want you to have that gun in your hand when those officers are poking around over there. Ok?
Caller: I understand that. Ok, but I have a right to protect myself,too sir.
Protect himself from what? How are these guys a threat to him at this point?
Operator: Yes, you do.
Caller: And you understand that and that the laws have been changed in this country since September the first, and you know it and I know it.
Operator: I understand that.
Caller: I have a right to protect myself.
Operator: I'm right there with you.
Caller: And a shotgun is a legal weapon. It's not an illegal weapon.
Operator: No it's not. I'm not saying that.
Caller: All right.
Operator: I'm not wanting you to you know....(interrupted)
Caller: He's coming out the window right now. I've gotta go buddy. I'm sorry but he's coming out the window.
Operator: Don't, don't don't go out the door. Mr. Horn? Mr. Horn?
Caller: They just stole something. I'm going out the window. I'm sorry.
Operator: Don't go outside.
Caller: I ain't going to let them get away with this (expletive). They stole something. They've got a bag of something.
Operator: Don't go outside the house.
Caller: I'm doing it.
Operator: Mr. Horn, do not go out the house.
Caller: I'm sorry. This ain't right.
Operator: You're going to get yourself shot if you go outside that house with that gun. I don't care what you think. Stay in the house.
Caller: You wanna make a bet? I'm gonna kill 'em
Whoa! Wait a minute here folks. What did he just say? Sounds like premeditation to me.
Operator: OK. Stay in the house.
Caller: They're getting away.
Operator: That's all right, property is not worth killing someone over.
More conversation, call taker trying to get information and telling caller to stay inside
Operator: No, I don't want you going outside Mr. Horn.
Caller: Well, here it goes buddy. You hear the shotgun clicking and I'm going.
Operator: Don't go outside.
Caller: ( To someone else) Move Your dead. ( Two gunshots heard in quick succession. A third shot is fired after a brief pause. Call ends.)
After the shooting Mr. Horn calls back. After brief conversation...
Operator: All right, Mr Horn are you out there right now?
Caller: No, I am inside the house I went back in the house. Man, they came running in my yard. Didn't know what the (expletive) they's gonna do. I shot 'em. OK?
Operator: Did you shoot somebody Mr. Horn?
Caller: Yes, I did. The cops are here right.....(interrupted)
More conversation about where exactly he is and where the gun is. Scene is then secured by officers on the scene.
Texas law does permit the use of deadly force to protect property, including a third parties property. Based on some of his comments I think his lawyer is going to earn every penny of his fee. However, KHOU the local CBS station on the ten o'clock news said their online survey asking if Mr. Horn did the right thing....... 61% said he did the right thing. 34% said he was wrong. 4% had no opinion. Any wagers on what the Grand Jury says?
Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis