Nope. He would have had to have known at the time that the boy had been invited into the house in order for that to matter. Since the girl lied and said she didn't know the boy, that was the knowledge the dad had at the time of the incident.
“He would have had to have known at the time that the boy had been invited into the house in order for that to matter. Since the girl lied and said she didn’t know the boy, that was the knowledge the dad had at the time of the incident.”
He had to have a reasonable belief that the boy was an intruder. It’s probably going to come down to whether the grand jury thinks that, under the circumstances, that would be a reasonable belief.
Another article says he questioned them, she claimed to not know boy, dad and boy argue, boy reaches for something and is shot..