Accused Burglar Sues Homeowner Who Shot Him

Channel 3000 (WISC-TV) (Wisconsin) ^ | 9/21/06 | n/a

[kiriath_jearim]

MADISON, Wis. -- An accused burglar who fell through the roof of a Janesville home and was shot is now suing the homeowner who shot him.

Kurt Prochaska was arrested last October and charged with burglary, WISC-TV reported.

The homeowner, Michael Rainiero, said he shot Prochaska after he refused to leave the house.

Prochaska's lawsuit claimed Rainiero used excessive force and that he intentionally shot him in the back, trying to sever his spinal cord.

The Rock County district attorney believed Rainiero acted in self-defense and never pursued charges against him.

[Dan Nunn]

[Clintonfatigued]

This is completely absurd, the very difinition of a frivolous lawsuit. One would hope for it to be laughed out of court, but with the number of liberal judges, it could proceed.

[Texican72]

Maybe the home owner should counter sue for the cost of repair to the roof and the bullet used.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

Michael Rainiero needs to use a larger weapon and place his shots better.

[baltoga]

Bad shot, dead people don't sue.

[FlingWingFlyer]

The problem here is, with our hilarious and out of control judicial system, there is a "judge" and a group of twelve morons out there that will agree with this scumbag.

[Lexington Green]

Note to self - make sure they're dead

[Star Traveler]

You said -- "Bad shot, dead people don't sue."

I thought estates could and heirs could (in addition to possibly the government, too [notwithstanding current prosecutor])...

Regards,
Star Traveler

[Star Traveler]

You said -- "Note to self - make sure they're dead"

Problem with that is that you can't cross-examine the dead...

Regards,
Star Traveler

[Rum Tum Tugger]

I thought estates could and heirs could (in addition to possibly the government, too [notwithstanding current prosecutor])...

But if the bad guy is no longer around, you're the only witness.

Anyone one who breaks into my home will never be able to sue with 4 or 5 44 magnum rounds in his chest.

[volunbeer]

This crap is another example of why we have too many lawyers.

I don't believe this lawsuit should get past the preliminary hearing but you never know these days.

[Bob Mc]

Heirs would not be in the house when the dead guy was shot. They can offer no evidence or testimony as of what transpired.

[river rat]

Insufficient Gun Control...

With adequate GUN CONTROL, the perp would be dead and incapable of pressing any claim...

Double and Triple taps should be SOP.
Multiple shots -- even emptying the magazine, supports the justification of FEAR for one's life.

Memorize the justification: "I was in fear for my life and the safety of my family"...

Semper Fi

[baltoga]

And if the dead man is clutching a butcher knife from the kitchen it's definitely self-defense.

[poobear]

"Anyone one who breaks into my home will never be able to sue with 4 or 5 44 magnum rounds in his chest."

Make those 4 44 magnum hollow points and all you'd have left is two legs and a head with arms!

[FFIGHTER]

Shoot-to-kill.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

"Why'd you shoot him 44 times?"

"Ran outta ammo."

[SuziQ]

The homeowner should demand a jury trial.

[lonevoice]

The Rock County district attorney believed Rainiero acted in self-defense and never pursued charges against him.

Weren't we just talking about this scenario? I'm still guessing that since we never hear the outcomes of these civil travesties that most, or all, get thrown out of court.