No charges against Texas man who killed burglars at his neighbor's house

[Armueller2001]

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline...man-clear.html

Texas grand jury has cleared a 62-year-old retiree who who shot and killed two men he suspected of burglarizing his neighbor's home last fall in the Houston suburb of Pasadena.

Joe Horn saw the men crawling out the windows of a neighbor's house and called 911. He told the dispatcher he had a shotgun and was going to kill the men. The dispatcher pleaded with Horn not to go outside, but Horn confronted the men and shot both in the back with a 12-gauge shotgun as they fled.

The suspected burglars, Hernando Riascos Torres, 38, and Diego Ortiz, 30, were unemployed illegal immigrants from Colombia. Torres was deported to Colombia in 1999 after a 1994 cocaine-related conviction.

Civil rights activists organized protests, saying that the shootings were racially motivated and that Horn engaged in vigilante justice.

"The message we're trying to send today is the criminal justice system works," Harris County District Attorney Kenneth Magidson said after the grand jury declined to indict Horn. The Pasadena Citizen has the DA's statement.

The way it should be, IMO. You break into someone's house, you deserve what you get.

[nickn]

Good.

[jon118]

He shot them in the back as they were running away. Plus it wasn't even his house. But ignoring that there was still no reason to shoot people who were running away, they weren't even trying to harm him in any way. There is no way self-defense can be claimed here. Plus from the call he seemed like he was enjoying it. Plus, the penalty for burglary isn't death, so why is it permissible here?

So to recap in short, he confronts them off of his property, they try to run, and he kills them. Bloody ridiculous. There is defending yourself and then there is vigilante justice, this is a case of the latter. We have a police force to deal with this sort of thing and they deal with it in a reasonable manner, not by simply killing anyone who breaks the law.

I don't believe that people shouldn't have the right to defend themselves and if that defense involves a firearm then fine, so long as the firearm is kept in check (licensed) and not something completely ridiculous like a fully automatic weapon. However, this was not self-defense, it was cold blooded murder and I don't see how anyone could be foolish enough to let this man go after what he did. But what goes around comes around, I'm sure he'll get his.

[WickedPissah]

I guess the law in Texas is that you can shoot to kill when defending your or a neighbor's property.

[gold_member_321]

[Armueller2001]

I guess it would have been a bit more of a gray area if he would have shot them as they were climbing into his neighbor's window... that would have been preventing the forcible felony "burglary"...

[Pacman]

Actually, a detective was at the scene and confirmed to the Grand Jury that one suspect closed distance with the shooter after he was warned to freeze. In the eyes of a police officer, he had reason to believe he was in jeopardy.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...s/5864151.html

[ElMon]

I'd be willing to bet that any other criminals who were considering burglarizing that area of town will have second thoughts. Good for him. Cue the obligatory 'society drove these men to commit crimes' tripe. The prospect of getting shot is a good reason to give up a life of crime, get off your lazy ass, and attempt to build a life through honest work like the rest of us. Just my opinion of course.

[dancehallclasher]

Originally Posted by Armueller2001

The way it should be, IMO. You break into someone's house, you deserve what you get.

Yeah man. Shoplifters too, they should be shot. I bet they'd think twice about doing it then!

[Jerry Ziarko]

Originally Posted by Pacman

Actually, a detective was at the scene and confirmed to the Grand Jury that one suspect closed distance with the shooter after he was warned to freeze. In the eyes of a police officer, he had reason to believe he was in jeopardy.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...s/5864151.html

Was he walking backwards?

[jrthebassguy]

I wish this issue should die. I live less than 10 miles from where this occurred, so I've heard about it more than I care to. Given Pacman's reason above, I fully support the decision.


Local racist...er, activist Quanell X keeps calling it a race issue and that they perfectly had the right to rob the home to "feed their families"



I know I won't be losing any sleep over dead criminals. Especially when they're more or less in my backyard, so to speak.

[Pacman]

Originally Posted by Jerry Ziarko

Was he walking backwards?

Don't ask me, a cop was an eyewitness, I think his testimony might have a little more weight than your armchair quarterbacking. Did you bother to read the link, or was it cooler just to post the rolleyes smiley?

indeed.

(by the way, I didn't know anything more about this than anyone else until I opened this thread. Then I read the stories. Amazing what happens when that happens, huh?)

[bradjonesbass]

"Good guys +1. Illegal Alien Criminals -2" I think that was the best quote in the comments following that story...

[Chriss62]

This doesn't seem right. Maybe some probation or something like that. He killed 2 people...

[bradjonesbass]

...who had come here illegally. One of them after having been deported once for dealing cocaine. they were breaking into a home in his neighborhood. according to an eyewitness cop one of the burglars charged at the shooter. Cops can't be everywhere. I bet the rest of the illegal alien criminals in houston are thinking long and hard about what neighborhood they're going to hit next.

[Lalabadie]

I wouldn't have done that. Shot in the air, yes. If they were to run away with stuff, do anything dangerous, etc. and I didn't have anything incapacitating, then I'd have shot them in the legs. No way I would shoot a man in the back because of some stolen goods.

I understand the private property reasoning, but to me it's totally overreacting, and this was a way too easy reason to shoot at someone.

[bradjonesbass]

cop training = if you have to shoot, shoot large body mass until the threat is stopped. You don't shoot for legs because you're more than likely just going to piss somebody off.

[ElMon]

Originally Posted by jrthebassguy

I wish this issue should die. I live less than 10 miles from where this occurred, so I've heard about it more than I care to. Given Pacman's reason above, I fully support the decision.


Local racist...er, activist Quanell X keeps calling it a race issue and that they perfectly had the right to rob the home to "feed their families"



I know I won't be losing any sleep over dead criminals. Especially when they're more or less in my backyard, so to speak.

Did he really say that !?!?!?!?!?!

[Lalabadie]

Originally Posted by ElMon

Did he really say that !?!?!?!?!?!

After the Flat Earth Society thing this morning, I can believe anything.

[Pacman]

Originally Posted by bradjonesbass

cop training = if you have to shoot, shoot large body mass until the threat is stopped. You don't shoot for legs because you're more than likely just going to piss somebody off.

You don't shoot for the legs because more than likely you're going to miss....