Posted on 11/29/2006 5:27:06 AM PST by xrp
Police say a 73-year-old man wasn't doing anything wrong last night in his Coon Rapids home when something wrong came to him.
"While he was in bed he heard someone breaking into the house," Anoka County Sheriff Captain Bob Aldrich said.
A burglar, police say broke in, and when he got to the second floor the 73-year-old man was waiting. "He keeps a rifle in his room for protection and in this instance he felt the need to use it and in this case he shot the intruder," Aldrich said.
The intruder died and the shooter, investigators say, will probably not be in any trouble for killing him. "You always have the right to defend yourself in your residence," Aldrich said.
Minnesota state statute 609.065 says:
"The intentional taking of a life of another is not authorized by section 609.06, except when necessary in resisting or preventing an offense which the actor reasonably believes exposes the actor or another to great bodily harm or death, of preventing the commission of a felony in the actor's place of abode."
Some neighbors of the homeowner are already coming to his defense for defending his safety, and, his home. "I believe that if they broke into his house and he was in there he was within his rights for what he did," said neighbor Jeffrey Hauf.
At this point police are still looking for a possible second suspect. The homeowner wasn't sure if one or two men broke in.
The homeowner has been questioned by police in the incident and he was never placed under arrest nor was he hurt during the break-in which happened around 11 Monday night.
Another one bites the dust.
Another heart warming Holiday story
Posted yesterday under different title http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1745148/posts
Don't forget the puke lawyer who will take the families case.
Why is it that there's always a fog of guilt toward those defending themselves? There's always the question as to whether the homeowner is in trouble for defending himself....
You are regurgitating Brady Bunch disinformation.
If it was a reasonably justifiable shooting, few lawyers will take the case because they work on contingency and if they lose, they get nothing and have wasted their time. A jury trial is a crap shoot.
Thanks. Date on the source cited 11/29/2006 at 0645hrs, so I thought it was a brand new story.
Admin Moderator, please lock this thread and reference the original story. Thanks.
"Why ... fog of guilt?" -- Because they use GUNS and GUNS are BAD!! Don'tcha know nothin'?
You forgot that he was also working on the cure for cancer....
Of course there is a fog of guilt toward the defender. The guy who broke into this house was an undocumented tenant. Like its his fault he picked a house with a gun owner who happens to be a good shot? I hope he didnt damage his walls. It so hard to get renovations done during the hoildays.
I think when a shooting like this occurs in CO, a though investigation is done, and then Law Enforcement offically clears the shooter. That completed procedure then gives immunity to the shooter against the types of lawsuits you are talking about.
So when you read that someone killed an intruder in self defense, "and the police are investigating and questioning the shooter" that is to protect the truely innocent shooter, not a ploy to charge him.
But I hate it when you have to clean up all the blood.
I'm guessing that the author of this article is not a native English-speaker. It's rather awkward.
Not a mention if they took his gun. My guess is they did, now he is vulnerable to another attack.
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.