Virginia man arrested for shooting and killing teen casing house for burglary and/or "filming a prank video" at 3am

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Homeowner was black, teen was white. Allegedly the homeowner thought the teens were trying to break in.

Which means they didn't knock and immediately run, or the homeowner was awake all night behind his door with a gun.

Exactly right.

This wasn’t a knock and run. This was a knock (probably more than once) and hang around causing enough commotion to give the homeowner reason to go find his gun and arm himself before opening the door.

This took minutes to transpire. Not seconds.

This, and a jury in rural Spotsylvania might well rule for the homeowner once the facts come out in court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Homeowner was black, teen was white. Allegedly the homeowner thought the teens were trying to break in.

Grand jury no-bill.

Rules are often different at night, more leeway for property owners defending their property, and being on property that is not yours doing criminal mischief at night, is a sure fire way to get a Darwin Award.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where does it say in the article that he was shot in the back? I didn’t read that in there anywhere.

The actual facts, more of which are probably not in the short article, are what matter. In Virginia you can shot someone if you think your life is in imminent danger. If a group of male teens are banging on my door, on my porch, trespassing on my property, and not leaving right away, what else do I think theyre there to do but break in.

I had teens at 4am come into my fenced in yard, wander around, high out of their mind. My bedroom is in the front of the house, they woke me up, I looked out the window, opened the window and yelled I was calling the police. They ran. If they were banging on the door over and over, or ringing the doorbell repeatedly, I would definitely get scared. People act like 911 comes right away, if they even answer at all.

But you shouldn’t open the door to shoot them. If you truly are in fear of your life, you grab your gun but keep the doors shut and locked, then shoot if they come in.

I don’t have much sympathy for someone who goes outside and then claims they shot in self defense. Someone’s at my door, I grab my kids, call the police, lock ourselves in the bathroom, and shoot only if they try to come into the bathroom after I’ve shouted I’m armed.

No where does any article say he shot the kid in the back nor does it say he opened the door and shot them. WE DONT KNOW. why do posters just make up facts? You’re making stuff up.

And in Virginia, you don’t have to give a warning.

I'm not making stuff up. The PP literally said "if people are banging on my door I assume they are breaking in".

We can all agree that if someone breaks into your house, yes, it's okay to shoot them.

But if someone is on your porch and you open the door, it doesn't sound like you're actually in fear for your life.

Give the stranger on your porch at 3 a.m. enough time to see what he is going to do, right? If he breaks in and is armed and shoots you or lets his buddies hiding behind bushes, then you can defend yourself.

[Anonymous]

Yeah I think it’s reasonable to interpret doorbell ringing at 3am as a lure to get you outside for bad reasons. The only other reason why someone would be knocking on your door at 3am is if your house is on fire.

People need to learn that when you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. No way would I ever convict any homeowner of any crimes when they’re peaceful in their own home and then suddenly put in the middle of what could very well be a crime setup against them or their family.

[Anonymous]

Gotta side with the homeowner on this one, unfortunate that the outcome was tragic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Homeowner was black, teen was white. Allegedly the homeowner thought the teens were trying to break in.

Which is not a wild assumption at 3am. But.. you can't shoot someone in the back either, as that's not self defense.

Not sure about VA law, but in many states you can if you think they are making off with property, or are possibly committing arson.

No you can't.

Yes you can in many areas. Learn some more about the laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The kids aren't ringing the doorbell and running. They actually try to kick in the door.

Yeah this is the latest IG/Facebook/TikTok/social media challenge/dare/prank.

To kick in someone's door while filming it, then run off.
Quite a bit more risky than just ringing/knocking on a door and running off.

Kids should also learn that the old lighting a bag of poo on fire on someone's doorstep is considered "arson" and homeowners would be justified in shooting them for attempting to set anything on fire on someone's property, especially at night.

Legal to use lethal force in many states for doing that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I think it’s reasonable to interpret doorbell ringing at 3am as a lure to get you outside for bad reasons. The only other reason why someone would be knocking on your door at 3am is if your house is on fire.

People need to learn that when you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. No way would I ever convict any homeowner of any crimes when they’re peaceful in their own home and then suddenly put in the middle of what could very well be a crime setup against them or their family.

+1

[Anonymous]

When someone kicks your door in and then sticks around long enough to get shot, they aren't playing a "prank."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Homeowner was black, teen was white. Allegedly the homeowner thought the teens were trying to break in.

Which means they didn't knock and immediately run, or the homeowner was awake all night behind his door with a gun.

Exactly right.

This wasn’t a knock and run. This was a knock (probably more than once) and hang around causing enough commotion to give the homeowner reason to go find his gun and arm himself before opening the door.

This took minutes to transpire. Not seconds.

This, and a jury in rural Spotsylvania might well rule for the homeowner once the facts come out in court.

Rural Spotsylvania?

[Anonymous]

Dumb kids and their prank was probably criminal in some way but nobody knows the facts around the shooting. You generally have to have reasonable fear of imminent death or serious injury to use deadly force. Someone outside your house isn’t a deadly threat unless they’re shooting into it, lighting it on fire, or actively breaking and entering. Trespassing outdoors and harassing you at 3am aren’t enough on their own to open fire.

My sympathies are with the homeowner but the burden is still on them to only employ a deadly weapon when appropriate. Maybe the facts will come out in their favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously this is a tragic situation, but come on - parents, teach your kids not to engage in this sort of stupidity for tiktok or whatever it is they’re doing. This was a worst case scenario outcome, but imagine this was an elderly woman living alone, or a couple with young kids…having random people at your house at 3 am would be terrifying. Don’t be selfish.

Men are a menace... I can't think of one single woman who'd shoot a kid in the back for running away from her front porch. I live alone and if someone knocked on my door at 3am, I wouldn't open the door or even try to, maybe call the police if someone needed help but that's about it. That's what peepholes are for, and door cams, not that I have one of those either.

Would you sic one of your many cats on an intruder?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dumb kids and their prank was probably criminal in some way but nobody knows the facts around the shooting. You generally have to have reasonable fear of imminent death or serious injury to use deadly force. Someone outside your house isn’t a deadly threat unless they’re shooting into it, lighting it on fire, or actively breaking and entering. Trespassing outdoors and harassing you at 3am aren’t enough on their own to open fire.

My sympathies are with the homeowner but the burden is still on them to only employ a deadly weapon when appropriate. Maybe the facts will come out in their favor.

A reasonable person would conclude that someone kicking your door is trying to break in and if the homeowner felt that he was in fear for his life, in Virginia, that is a defense.

You don’t need to shoot into the door, light the door on fire, or actively be actually breaking and entering. Standard is what a reasonable person would assume. So yes, the facts matter (as with every single other case).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When someone kicks your door in and then sticks around long enough to get shot, they aren't playing a "prank."

In I think it was Ohio a few years back it was a national story when a high schooler living in an apt in a ritzy town claimed to have gotten lost on his way to school and was trying to get into a home. The elderly homeowner shot in the air as the boy ran off (so-called warning shot), not even at the kid, and the court system still railroaded the man. 5 years in prison or something near that. I think it was later revealed the teen was in the alternative high school. I'm assuming the boy's family also sued the man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When someone kicks your door in and then sticks around long enough to get shot, they aren't playing a "prank."

In I think it was Ohio a few years back it was a national story when a high schooler living in an apt in a ritzy town claimed to have gotten lost on his way to school and was trying to get into a home. The elderly homeowner shot in the air as the boy ran off (so-called warning shot), not even at the kid, and the court system still railroaded the man. 5 years in prison or something near that. I think it was later revealed the teen was in the alternative high school. I'm assuming the boy's family also sued the man.

Oddly enough, legally speaking, if someone fires a "warning shot", they are more likely to become the victim of the law than the criminal.

The legal reason being that if you didn't feel your life was threatened enough to shoot to kill/stop the perp, that you shouldn't have shot at all, and shooting, even into the ground or air, was illegal and often they will try to tack on assault charges on top of it.

So the moral to the story is.....never bring out a gun until you are ready to use it and need it.