Posted on 11/14/2006 7:11:42 AM PST by HotTubDave
Home invader shot in head in Knoxville Tuesday, November 14, 2006 By Jim McKinnon, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette A Knoxville man was charged with shooting and critically wounding an armed gunmen during a drug related home invasion robbery last night. Police withheld the identity of the wounded intruder. The resident suspected of shooting him has been identified as Bruce Charles Jr. The charges stem from an incident at 11:30 p.m. in the 300 block of Suncrest Street, where police found the 19-year-old intruder lying on the living room floor with a bullet wound of the head. Mr. Charles, 20, said he had been at home with his 2-month-old baby and the infant's 19-year-old mother when two men entered his residence. One of the intruders pulled a pistol and demanded money, police said. Mr. Charles retrieved a gun and shot one of the intruders in the head, police said. The man who was shot was taken to Mercy Hospital, where he was in critical condition today. Mr. Charles was charged with illegal possession of a firearm, possession of marijuana and possession with intent to deliver the pot.
(Excerpt) Read more at post-gazette.com ...
The cops can't search without a warrant, and shouldn't have just cause to believe that drugs were involved absent some other corroborating evidence...like perhaps the homeowner was already under investigation for drug dealing, or his assailant was a known user, etc.
What I'm getting at is that I suspect there's something important that the article isn't telling us.
How MUCH pot before you get charged with intent to distribute? Seems to me that it would be more than a couple hits.
Ahh, the third guy. Yeah, I bet that's it. The third guy turned 'em in.
Note to bad guys - if you shoot a perp in your home, get rid of all illegal substances before cops show up.
It wouldn't be the first time a pot smoking idiot called the police when someone tried to steal their pot. He probably wasn't smart enough to tidy up the house and hide the drugs, spray some air freshener around before the cops showed up, or he just didn't think possesion of illegal weapons (was he a felon?) and a pound of pot was illegal.
I'm trying to figure out how the wife/mother went from 19 years old in the posted article to 17 years old in the linked article.
Granted. The people in question may actually be copper-riveted idiots.
And a 19 year old mother? Some nice home they are raising a child in.
"Doesn't sound like they believed the "home invader" story, does it?"
Sure it does. They didn't charge him with shooting the guy. It's just he had all that marijuana lying around during the questioning so they had to charge him for it.
Sounds to me like he was arrested for drug charges and illegal possession of a weapon, but not for shooting the home invader. The headline writer/editor apparently has either extremely poor reading skills or an agenda against citizens' rights to defend themselves.
Heh, heh. Yup. I bet that's it. Sounds like a drug deal gone bad to me. Notice that they also charged him with intent to deliver. I wonder to whom?
Somebody changed the headline. I suspect the one with the agenda is here.
Dave, did you change the title, or did the newspaper's website change the title after you posted it?
The link goes to a story with the following title: Home invader shot in head in Knoxville
You might want to be proactive and ask the mods to change the title to the correct one. I was going to send the newspaper an email about the completely inaccurate and misleading headline. Glad I checked the link first.
The likeliest explanation is a drug deal gone bad and the leftist
newspaper trying to take full advantage of the situation
and use the headline to trash one's right to defend self at home.
Link says 17 year old mother. HOLY CRAP! How long before I start supporting this child?
Warrants aren't always needed especially at the scene of a crime. Other evidence may have been in plain view as well, plus everything you have mentioned, such as this person being a person of interest to police.
He wasn't charged with actually shooting the other guy, but that could be because he isn't dead yet.
Bad headline.
But then, the mantra of reporters is, "Made you look!"
A more appropriate headline would be "Drug Dealer shoots Customer."
ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.