We have another Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground controversy this week. In Whitestown, Indiana, Maria Florinda Rios Perez, 32, died in her husband’s arms after the couple went to the wrong address to clean a house. The unidentified homeowner reportedly shot through the door. A GoFundMe site has been set up for her family. She was the mother of four.
Reports indicate that the couple was trying to use a key on the door. The occupants called the police in the early morning about someone trying to open their door. As they continued to try to gain entry with the wrong key, a bullet came through the door and struck Perez.
Police responded to a call of a possible home invasion, but later concluded that “the facts gathered do not support that a residential entry occurred.” However, the department added that “It was later determined that the individuals attempting to enter the home were members of a cleaning crew who had mistakenly arrived at the wrong address.”
The matter is currently under review by the Boone County Prosecutor’s Office. Boone County Prosecutor Kent Eastwood stated that the case is complex due to language in the state’s stand-your-ground law.
Indiana has a robust law (below) that allows the use of lethal force to prevent a forcible entry into a home. It specifically provides for the use of deadly force “to prevent or terminate the other person’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.” The “curtilage” includes the area immediately adjacent to a home
In this case, the police indicated that the couple was “attempting to enter the home.” That is why this case is particularly challenging for prosecutors. Under the law, the homeowner was not required to wait for actual entry or confirm whether the person was armed.
The common law has long offered protections even for reasonable mistakes. Castle doctrine states codified and, in some states, expanded on those common law protections. They have resulted in some highly controversial cases, such as that of Tom Horn in Texas.
The case reminds me of the Donofrio case that we discussed earlier. He was shot and killed on the front porch of a house in Columbia, South Carolina after trying to enter the wrong home near the campus around 2 am.
It is also reminiscent of the shooting of a Japanese student in Baton Rouge. The 16-year-old Japanese exchange student, Yoshihiro Hattori, was looking for a Halloween party and scared the wife of Rodney Peairs when he spoke a strange language and approached the house. Peairs shot him in the chest with a .44 Magnum handgun and was later cleared under a Make My Day law as mistaken defense of his home and self. We also discussed a tragic case involving the killing of a law student.
The state law also supplies civil immunity for homeowners in such cases.
You can make your own assessment based on the language of the statute. The Indiana law states in part:
Sec. 2. (a) In enacting this section, the general assembly finds and declares that it is the policy of this state to recognize the unique character of a citizen’s home and to ensure that a citizen feels secure in his or her own home against unlawful intrusion by another individual or a public servant.
…
(c) A person is justified in using reasonable force against any other person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person, employer, or estate of a person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.
(d) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against any other person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.
(e) With respect to property other than a dwelling, curtilage, or an occupied motor vehicle, a person is justified in using reasonable force against any other person if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other person’s trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person’s possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person’s immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
only if that force is justified under subsection (c).
What a tragedy. It is entirely possible that it sounded like they were picking the lock to the occupant inside.
My issue is that before firing through the door, the occupant should have said stop or they’d shoot, or to go away. Granted, they might have been afraid the people “breaking in” were armed, or would come around to another window or door. It’s not clear if the occupant said a word. If you’re going to shoot blind through a door, and claim Castle Doctrine, I’d think someone would have to be actively breaking down the door. I don’t know if a belief they were picking the lock would suffice.
It’s not clear if they were pushing on the door in addition to trying to get the key in the lock.
I would never shoot blind through a door unless I’d called out to them, and if I was darn sure they were breaking in. Someone should always verify a target before ringing that bell that cannot be unrung.
My own father stopped a nighttime break-in by chambering a round on our side of the front door, and quietly lying in wait. The burglar heard that unmistakable sound, there was a pause, and then from the other side of the door came a heartfelt apology and statement that he’d be going now.
It’s a bad law. Contribute at the gofundme.
.
A note to the Anon who questioned the honesty of the gorilla on the stage video I posted below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo
It is a legitimate demonstration and I know in part from my own experience watching it for the first time.
I was one of those who completely missed seeing the gorilla come on stage while I was counting the number of times the students passed the ball. Watching it again this time I also missed the change of the background color and the one student who left the stage.
That said, if I had been one of the 50% who spotted the gorilla the first time I would have been certain that it was so obvious that NOBODY could have missed it before and that the whole thing was a silly prank as Anon believes.
I would like to think that the evidence would ultimately persuade me that it was truly a legitimate experiment. But maybe not and that uncertainty is a lesson in itself.
It is a valuable experiment. Trivially one gets a glimpse of how magicians perform their illusions. But more importantly one gets an idea how witnesses can honestly testify to things they haven’t seen or should have seen but did not. Or, for that matter, how scientists can be misled while doing honest research and why it is important for their work to be duplicated by others.
Lastly it suggests how others might be manipulated without their being aware. And, yes, I have used it to accomplish what I convinced myself were good ends. I suppose we all have.
The fact that the experiment is stupefying in what it portends makes it all the more important to be aware of it.
Here is a more informative version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGQmdoK_ZfY
Witnesses are not digital recorders.
Each hunting season people are killed by hunters who swear they saw a deer in their sights and not a person. In fact, with their state of mind they probably did see a deer. One of my 8th grade classmates was just such a ‘deer’ and I wondered then how that could have led to his death; he didn’t look like a deer to me. Now I know that if I had been hunting and prepared to see deer in the brush I might have shot him too. It is a sobering thought. And a warning. The next ‘deer’ or ‘terrorist’ might be a cleaning lady come to the wrong house.
Update on the terrible death of Maria Perez indicates the investigation will take at least another week as crowds gather for justice.
The occupant has not been identified. I feel the tragedy of the mothers death. I also feel the tragedy for the occupant. Not an iota of grace for the occupant.
Yes, the commenter have convicted the occupant of murder. They’ll take him out and hang him or her. He’ll require protection and that’s how stupid it is. Not any caring about the occupant covered by law.
Let’s get a mob, mob justice. Btw epstein was killed.
^ commenters
Quite incredible that mobs seek influence over investigations. It’s amazing. The occupant got up that morning called police before 7 AM and a tragic accident happens. Do they honestly think he planned it or thought let me just shoot her and ruin my life?
^^^ In the Epstein murder the guards were not held accountable. They’re probably still working. Mob justice?
I’m that person and I agree witnesses are unreliable as are memories. In this case the gorilla is a hack. I cannot be convinced otherwise.
Yes, its important information about testimony as E Jean Carroll was believed or Christine Ford with the 37 years lapse of time.
It’s a hacked video. Thanks, Young but no. Yale and MIT have a bunch of these. BTW it’s how Jesus walked around after his death and wasn’t seen.
Thanks
AND do you know why no one has ever seen God? Either he looks like a gorilla OR he looks like a person and you see him all the time. 🤔.
Oh you better be nice, you better not pout. Santa clause is coming to town… he sees you when you’re sleeping. He knows when you’re awake…
Poor Maria and family and poor people who’re so afraid they shoot through doors. 😭. Let’s not coerce the investigation and all lawyered up. Let’s look at the 🏰 laws. 31 States have them.
Personally folks, I’ve been beaten up with concussion and robbed. You?
Happy Thanksgiving Barack.
Anon- “BTW it’s how Jesus walked around after his death and wasn’t seen.”
There is a reasonable argument that Jesus was not dead when taken from the cross and he was seen after that locally.
Moreover, according to tradition Peter met him on the Appian Way years later, presumably near the present church and burial site for San Sebastian. I stopped there years ago when driving out of Rome on the Appian Way and visited the church and catacombs beneath it.
I’m certain Christ didn’t die.
It says it’s an “illusion”. David Copperfield can make the statue of 🗽 disappear.
Overall I agree, Young, that testimony is rickety.
Whoever shot her needs to go to jail for 20 to life. SHE DOES NOT LOOK LIKE A THREAT AT ALL and if the guy was at the door, he would have seen her try to use the keys. THE shooter is a racist in my opinion
do you understand the phrase ” through the door” …. they didn’t see her
You’re the only racist here, you show it every day.
She didn’t look like a threat?! What exactly does a threat look like? How does a threat look different than her, and how can you tell?
Anon, what is the race of the occupant?
“If the homeowner shot through the door, which should be obvious, I’d vote to convict on some variety of homicide charge, and I’d vote against the homeowner in a civil trial. ”
No worries. You would be the very first juror challenged by any competent defense attorney, and subsequently dismissed by the judge. I very much doubt if the prosecutor would put up much of a fight to that.
Ah, hung jury? There’s the law to contend with here.
Trump was raucously and comprehensively booed at the Washington Commanders, Detroit Lions game.
Wow, I can’t believe George Soros bought up all those seats and paid all those people to dress up as Commanders fans.
Apparently, Trump has demanded that the Commanders name their new stadium after him.
Felony Field has a certain ring to it !!!!
TDS is very painful, isn’t it?😂🤣
Not as painful as TVS (Trump Validation Syndrome). 🤣
Hoping that makes sense to someone, somewhere.😂🤣
Or you could just look at the real world as it actually is without your TDS.
Trump is far from perfect. But he still is the best president in the 21st century – by a long shot.
None of us are entitled t have the presidency and govenrment that we personally want.
We get the govenrment that elections constrained by the constitution and the law provide.
There will always be questions about the 2020 lawless covid election.
But there is no doubt that Trump was legitimately elected twice. The 2024 election confirms that whether the 2020 election was lawful or not, people ultimately decided it was a mistake.
I did not vote for Trump – my Choices – people like Gary Johnson and JoJo Johnson did not win.
Fortunately I do not have to carry the shame of voting for Hillary, Joe, or Kamala.
Regardless – they all lost. The people in accordance with the process specified by the constitution chose Trump. And they chose his platform even more than they chose him.
They did not chose Biden or Harris or Clinton and they rejected their platforms.
As Obama said – Elections have consequences. The country lived through the disaster that was the Bush and Obama and Biden presidencies. It will not only survive the Trump presidency – it will thrive.
I find it interesting – there is panic right and left as it appears the shutdown is likely to cost 1% growth in the 4th qtr of 2025. That still puts 4th qtr 2025 growth higher than the average growth during Obama’s 8 years, and likely about Biden’s growth after adjusting for inflation – which likely means the 4 year net growth was negative.
So both parties are panicing because the negative economic impact of the Shutdown would leave growth Higher than the average for democrats in the 21st century.
Harris has won some total zero primary elections. When Harris dropped out of the race in 2020 her approval rating was 2% among Democrats. She is so weak and so pathetic and such a weak-minded loser that she blamed her fellow Democrats for being sexist. God forbid she look in the mirror and see that she is maybe the second most unlikable candidate in history behind only cankles
Who is JoJo Johnson?
PS: I didn’t vote for Trump in 2016, but I did in 2020 and 2024.
The shutdown is a scandal. Snap and insurance subsidy? Why weren’t the people calling for jobs? Why are the people dependent upon government and not businesses? What caused this?
Now the people are dependent upon illnesses as an industry and with graft? Who decided that.
Whatever you do do it well. It’s incredible.
Why would Trump want the commanders field named after the Biden’s and Comey and James, and Schiff and the long long list of people who have committed Fellony’s to try to take him down ?
I personally don’t care whether they rename it to “Trump Field” or not, so long as the restore the proper team name of “Washington Redskins”…
He’s rooting for the wrong team. He would have been cheered in Detroit.
So?
U only heard what you wanted to hear, Missy.😂🤣
So ?
*. Under subsection (c) the homeowner acted within the law.
A few that I’d like to know.
Did Maria Florinda Rios Perez or her husband speak English?
Who is the person that gave her the address of the house?
Who is the person that gave her the key?
Was she here in the US legally?
Did the shooter ever hear of Tren de Aragua?
It seems like the homebuilder contributed some negligence to this travesty by failing to put temporary identifiers on its model homes and matching IDs on the keys. What they did instead was put the privacy of its homeowners in jeopardy by asking the cleaners to clean homes without any identifiers except “try the key” on the keyring.
Why are you people so obsessed with assigning blame to those other than the shooter ???
Why are you so obsessed with trying to find some reason to shift blame elsewhere ???
This was a negligent criminal act, and only the shooter is to blame !!!!
You would hold the iceberg at fault for the sinking of the Titanic.
Absolutely unbelievable !!!!!
“Why are you people so obsessed with assigning blame to those other than the shooter ???”
Why are you people so obsessed with demanding there can be absolutely no context or nuance to at least possibly mitigate what happened? Especially when you have absolutely zero interest in knowing all the facts while demanding the right to pronounce judgement.
Why don’t you just demand they be dragged out of their house, given a five minute long fair trial on their front lawn and then executed by strangulation in public?
Absolutely unbelievable!!!!
Look at and read the go fund me page. You, anon, may be closer to the truth. Eye for an eye meets subsection (c).
The homeowner must move and change his name.
^^^ occupant files civil suit against all parties for ruining his life and any other applicable burden.
Notify police of gofundme with targetted occupants home at website. Proceed via attorney. Check licenses and insurance.
Brother, your life is wrecked.
4th world
Yep, that’s what they did to my “Old Dixie “, my Old Dixie Wrecked!
I 👍
“You would hold the iceberg at fault for the sinking of the Titanic.”
Laws of Nature state that the Boat (Titanic) should not have been there in the first place (In the wrong place at the right time), it created the Man-Made event, upon which Man lost.
100 Points awarded to Mother Nature.
Anon, they had deleted lifeboats prior to anchors aweigh. Negligence
Exactly how is theShooter to know the difference between a cleaning lady and a criminal trying to enter their home ?
This was a tragic mistake – but the mistake is not on the part of the shooter.
The liability lies with whoever gave these people the wrong address.
Words, you know, communication!
One can not reasonably believe there is a threat to the home if a woman with cleaning supplies shows up and cannot use her key to enter.
First of all how should they have known it was a woman with cleaning supplies? Someone unauthorized was trying to enter the home, so they defended it.
Second, what on earth prevents a woman with cleaning supplies from being a criminal? Is it her female bits that prevent her from being a criminal, or is it that crimes can’t be committed in the presence of cleaning supplies?
It was her disguise, Millhouse. Cleaning lady by day but….
Anon, MANY cleaning ladies are also criminals. You have to be living under a rock not to have heard of MANY incidents of cleaning ladies robbing their employers blind.
There are hundreds of thousands of cleaning ladies. It makes sense that even a tiny percentage of robbers will result in many incidents. Most violent crime, 90%+ is by men. Lock them all up to make the world safer?
There was nothing to defend against; they defended nothing. Many humans use something called “language” to discuss intentions and find information to make decisions. This may be astounding, but burglars don’t break in from the front door. Something about being seen from the street.
Negligence?
Yes, the Velasquez family is the huge loss of a life. They’re the big losers.
Justice is care for the 1 year old until he’s 18 and the loss of a mother he’ll never know. Ryan Homes will provide this rickety bridge over a crevasse event with justice.
How can this be avoided in the future? Where are all of the mistakes? These castle laws work well sometimes and sometimes not. If she had not been killed are the errors still existent? It’s like the roof is rotten isn’t it.
There is possibly some civil liability for Ryan Homes. If they provided the wrong address.
But the Velasquez’s were treasspassing. And the duty to knock and announce was theirs – not he home owner, and not Ryan homes.
We are all sorry about this tragedy. Life is not fair. Sometimes small mistakes result is enormous horrible consequences.
There is no problems with the Castle doctrine – and this shooting would likely be legal in states without the castle doctrine. Homes are places that people have the right to be safe. Several items in the declaration of independence are about King George’s denial of colonists rights to security in their homes that all other British enjoyed.
Do not break into someone else’s home – especially an occupied home.
If there is the slightest doubt – knock on the door, ring the bell – get permission.
In the scenario in this case – the allegedly incorrect information provided to the cleaners did NOT grant them the right to break and enter someone else’s occupied home merely because they beleived otherwise.
Those of you on the left keep trying to place a burden on the home owner to verify the cleaners were criminals before shooting – as if the bad guys have “criminal” tattooed on their forehead.
The law properly places the burden where it belongs – on those seeking to enter a property that is not theirs.
Left wing nuts engage in shallow thinking – unable to grasp that – The homeowner had no safe way to verify the people trying to break in were not crooks. While the cleaners DID ability to correct their error.
Knock and announce.
John, they did not break and enter. They attempted. The law says an attempt can be thwarted as it occurs preventing it. That means shot through a door or window or rooftop.
If they are illegal entries to the US, deport. They can file a civil suit from Guatemala. Forgiveness is not extended to them because they aren’t forgiving the occupants. No one really understands forgiveness must be passed around in meaning and Mr. Rios on gofundme wants someone to pay.
If Mrs. Perez had a heart attack and died what would happen? Her 17 year old daughter would become the mother of the 1 year old. Her fate was to die of a gunshot.
So it is. That’s how messed up this 4th world is and check Mr. Rios for legal citizenship. Why not. Why not. Jay Jones wants to kill children. Why not.
String up Mayorkas and Biden.
If the shooter had a heart attack, then Mrs. Perez would still be alive.
What is “treasspassing”? It’s only trespassing when they have been informed that they are not allowed on the property. Unless there is a NO TRESPASSING sign or specific instruction this comes under the allowance for anyone to approach any home for any lawful purpose.
Don’t use a spell checker or check your posts. It makes them indistinguishable from ChatGPT output when prompted to write like a toddler.
“Knock and announce.” The cleaners would knock and announce and not have keys if there was supposed to be someone there to greet them and let them in. They would probably ask if anyone was there after opening the door, just to be sure when the sound of their voice could carry.
I bet this killer heard the husband and wife speaking Spanish about why the keys aren’t working.
How far from the interior of a home is it OK to open fire? Someone turns into the drive to drop off a package? To turn around? Steps on the porch to put a leaflet on the door knob? To bring over a misdirected package? To welcome someone to the neighborhood – don’t even have to touch the door knob, just step onto the property.
I think there should be a requirement to put a prominent notice that all visitors may be killed without notice and for no reason for any house that has a gun stored there. Or is this the default in paranoid America? A truly Libertarian paradise if it is.
No. Thevperps would be forewarned you’re armed and come in blazing.
You’ve kept with the meaning of warrant, John. Play out the rest of it. Who gave the warrant to the cleaning people? Probable cause to enter? Obviously a no knock cleaning order?
Ask?
Maybe they did. This is a one sided story.
Not to the Rios Velasquez family, John. Read the go fund me page.
Will the police get to the bottom of it? Highly unlikely. Let’s not forget the Epstein murder.
The homeowner is a member of tren de arugula and Velasquez ms13.
Or maybe….it was Maria’s jealous paramour.
Eye for an eye world collides with subsection(c). The two don’t mix.
It would be more interesting if it was a cop doing a “lock” check, rattling door knobs because they were given the wrong address or ignored the address on a wellness check. Per a recent incident, the police under those circumstances do not announce they are police in order to prevent alerting any burglar inside.
Don’t shoot when you cannot see the target is Rule #1 for responsible gun ownership. They were irresponsible in shooting blindly through the door.
It is you that is obsessed with blame.
The real world is not perfect. I do not see any criminal liability for anyone in this.
There is no crime here.
People die all he time without crimes occuring.
Every fatal automobile accident is not a crime.
There is possibly some civil liability for whoever got the address wrong.
But that is it.
Is this sad ?
Absolutely. But again people die in sad accidents.
Mens Rea? Yeah, it’d scare the shorts off me. Was the gunman a man?
The home owner intended to kill the persons on the other side of the door. It was premeditated and certainly not accidental.
How to prevent the accident?
Who is the occupant?
How the hell do you know anon? The homeowner has ptsd after having been beaten nearly to death and dragged behind a car. He needs a fence around his property with an intercom and buzzed entry like in NYC so no one can get into the building. The man needs an intercom and fence and no entry door should be accessible from the street anymore. WTH do you think gated communities are being built.
Party is over. OVER.
He acted within the law subsection (c).
Did the invaders know about the castle law and subsection(c)?
Perhaps the fault is within the castle law? A woman shows up to work and is shot to death? The employer is? That’s a heck of a job. Don’t walk on any property at all ever.
Yeah, they’ll pay as they aren’t protected under the castle law. Someone always pays. Loss of life should be millions. This is what happens when Biden said surge and people have been strangled and otherwise murdered and people like Jay Jones are elected as lawmen and KBJ is for felons rights and Hakeem says the weaponizing of hunger.
The homeowner appears to have acted rationally.
Yes, there’s the weak spot. The occupant can also sue because a defense attorney is expensive if he’s charged. He’ll need to relocate, as well. The Velasquez family can also unless Ryan Homes has a contract signed by Mr or Mrs Velasquez as business owners.
I’m sure you see more than I but that’s a lay person’s view.
Most people would have simply looked out the window from a house in a nice neighborhood like the one depicted on the link for the GoFundMe page. The homeowner had no reason to be so afraid; he had no reason for such a violent reaction. A warning shot? Possibly. Try him and give him the opportunity to justify his overwhelming fear.
Are you nuts ? No one robs nice neighborhoods ?
Why can’t we blame left wing nuts – YOUR idiocy is responsible for driving crime rates up – especially violent crime.
Attempting to enter someone’s occupied home without their permission is an extremely serious crime.
You are demanding that the resident must figure out the mental intent of the person trying to get into his home.
You say look out the window – and that is going to accomplish what ?
Is there some magical way of telling dangerous violent criminals from cleaners at thee wrong house ?
The Duty not to break into a home rests with the cleaners. It is their responsibility to get the address right.
It is the company that hired them that is responsible to provide the correct address.
Fear is not the justification – someone trying to enter his home without permission is the justification.
There is nothing to prosecute here.
Turley focuses on Stand your ground and castle doctrine laws – but hundreds of years of common law allow you to use deadly force to protect yourself and your home.
So, he needed lethal protection from a cleaning lady?
Was Oscar Pistorius remorseful or was he trying to dump her anyway?
No he needed lethal protection against someone breaking and entering.
You seem to think it is possible to determine whether someone has criminal intent by looking at them.
As I noted before – real cleaning people often engage in theft.
Criminals also pretend to be cleaners or meter readers or police or … to gain entrance.
This is just a part of why the DUTY to obtain permission to enter rests with the person seeking entry.
Criminals do not come with marks on their forehead saying “I am a criminal”.
They come looking like crazed drug addicts, and they come looking like police officers.
And they also come looking like cleaners.
It was the duty of whoever hired the cleaners to get the address right.
It was the duty of the cleaners to verify that.
It was the duty of the cleaners to verify they were at the model – not someone’s home.
It was the duty of the cleaners to verify the unit was no occupied, and if it was to obtain permission to enter.
I do this all the time as part of one of my businesses. While I do not enter apartments to clean and NORMALLY,
I have lots of excellent verification I am at the right place.
I do not ever enter what might be someone else’s home without the property management people with me.
Without them having provided notice days in advance.
Without them knocking and announcing before entry.
On rare occasions I have had to deal with incompetent property managers that had a big ring of keys and did not know which key went to which apartment. Whenever that happens I am pretty much everyone with me leaves the property manager at the door and gets some distance away.
While I have never had anyone shoot through the door while I was there – I was at one complex that had occured the day before. And I have frequently had situations where the person living in the apartment was present when they were not supposed to be, as well as instances in which they got violent.
Problems are not common, but they are not so rare that it is not perfectly reasonable to assume that even after notice, and knocking and announcing, that things can go wrong.
Further – while this meets the reasonable person standard – that standard does not apply when the FACTS are that a crime is being committed.
It is correct to note that the cleaners did not have the intent to commit a crime – and if charged would not likely have been convicted. But the FACT is they were committing multiple crimes – they were tresspassing, and they were breaking and entering and they were breaking and entering an occupied space.
They were not authorized to be there.
Yes a mistake had been made, and that mistake was in innocent mistake.
But that does not change the FACT that the only thing distinguishing the cleaners conduct from a convictabl crime was mens rea – criminal intent.
The FACTS are the home owner was experiencing an attempted breakin to an occupied home.
It is not possible, and not the home owners duty to mind read the person at the door to determine if they did not intend to do what they were doing.
It is not the home owners duty to figure out that other people made a mistake.
They broke nothing and entered nowhere, so you can stop claiming they were breaking and entering. They weren’t attempting to break anything and therefore could not enter.
Check the well water you are drinking. I think someone dumped LSD into it and is poisoning you.
Had the killer heard the couple speaking English he likely would have heard them say “I am sure this is the house we are supposed to clean but the key they gave us isn’t working.” Instead, they heard Spanish and being bigots, decided that Spanish speaking people are all killers.
And carpet layers! They roll up the dead bodies in the carpet and carry them out to the van.
Some people use children saying “Trick or Treat” as a way to get unsuspecting homeowners to open their front doors. Better be safe than sorry and shoot the first ones who try that.
Kirk’s throat being blown off and the attempt on DJT, Kavanaugh and so many others requires no trial at all.
That man needs a fence and intercom.
But you didn’t address the position: Most people would have just looked out the window, and this tale would have never made the news. How many times have situations just like this been resolved without much concern at all? I would have wanted primarily to avoid damage to my front door. I had a guy I didn’t know from down the street knock on the door to give me a letter that had been misdelivered; I guess a knock is materially different from the rattling of keys.
“Most people would have just looked out the window”
Because that would have told you WHAT ?
AGAIN – criminals do not not have “I am a criminal” tattooed on their forehead.
Sometimes they look like crazed drug addicts.
Sometimes they look like cleaners.
Sometimes they no only look like cleaners but ARE cleaners and are still criminals.
It is uncommon for a criminal to look like a cleaner.
But they always look like something,
and unless they are stupid – which fortunately most are – they deliberately try to look like something innocent.
Just a few weeks ago criminals robbed the Louve disguised as construction workers.
“I would have wanted primarily to avoid damage to my front door.”
Which is your choice. And the odds are the cleaner at your door is an actual cleaner at the wrong address.
But if you are wrong – you will have avoided damage to your door by increasing the risk to your life.
“I had a guy I didn’t know from down the street knock on the door to give me a letter that had been misdelivered; I guess a knock is materially different from the rattling of keys.”
Yes it is – A knock is a request for permission to enter.
Rattling keys is not.
As I noted – things similar to this happen all the time.
We do not have constant shootings because:
Care is taken to get addresses right.
Even when you have provided notice and are at the right place – you look for evidence that the place is occupied,
AND you knock and announce anyway.
I enter apartments to do bank assessments probably 100 times a year.
There is a process that is followed. It ALWAYS included know and anounce – even for units that are purportedly vacant.
I would further note we have EXACTLY this problem with Police serving warrants all the time.
Getting a “no knock” warrant is supposed to be very nearly impossible
to avoid EXACTLY this circumstance.
Hardly a year goes by in which police somewhere do not either get shot themselves or shoot someone innocent serving a warrant on the wrong address.
I hear that people are pretending to be doing apartment assessments all the time as a pretext to robbery and murder. I hope you don’t look like a criminal, though you since you say (pun!) anyone could be a criminal, then, well, be careful out there. If you are shot, recall that it’s a forgivable mistake that anyone could make and is all your fault. I
Knock and announce is a way to get people to open the door so criminals don’t have to kick it in. The door opens and the criminals just shoot anyone who opened it.
If you knock, expect to get shot.
How the hell do you know that, Clare Voyant?
What a shame that this should happen to decent people all the way around.
I do think one shouldn’t even have a finger on the trigger, much less pull it, unless you have identified who is on the other end of the barrel and you are are sure you want to kill them. Shooting through a door seems reckless to me. Too easy to make a terrible mistake.
But, given the flood of criminal illegals combined with lax enforcement and wussy judges and laws, it is much easier to think you are in great danger when some stranger is trying to enter your home. A failure of government is a factor in this tragedy.
That said, in a excited state you sometimes see what you expect to see rather than what is actually there. That is why each hunting season some hunters bag a human thinking they are shooting a deer.
You don’t see the obvious at times.
Have a look at this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGQmdoK_ZfY
I think that if the homeowner were charged I would have a fair chance of defending him successfully.
The homeowner may have truly believed he was seeing home invaders and that he was in danger. He has to respond to his reality even though it is a mistaken reality. Part of the defense would likely demonstrate just how easy it is to ‘see’ something that isn’t actually there but that given the circumstances the mistaken perception was within normal human reactions.
Did you see the gorilla in the video? I didn’t first time I watched it. This time I saw the gorilla but not the other changes.
All the defense needs is one juror thinking he could have made that mistake with some stranger trying to enter his home. It happens.. Reasonable doubt.
What the hell is your point ???
Why are you so obsessed with trying to find some justification for a reckless, criminal act ???
The shooter clearly saw what was happening at his front door, and no reasonable person would conclude that a home invasion was underway.
Home invasions rely on the surprise of a rapid forcible entry, not someone standing there at 7.00am fumbling with keys.
Anon– “Why are you so obsessed with trying to find some justification for a reckless, criminal act ???”
Nope. Don’t get so emotional; it interferes with mental clarity.
I am just looking at the case from both a prosecutor’s argument and a defense lawyer’s argument.
I have already said that it looks reckless to shoot through a door. I would likely focus on that were I prosecuting.
On the other hand I am also interested in sketching a defense argument, and I think there is one that might win though it would have to be more elaborate than the state’s case to win and therefore more fun to think through.
Whichever side I was on, I would want to anticipate and think through the other side.
You, on the other hand, are emotionally committed to a conclusion and can’t see the gorilla on the stage, if there is one.
At what point is it not reckless to defend yourself ? After you have been disarmed ?
John,
If I were prosecuting I would try to put the jurors in the shoes of the cleaning lady.
Defending I would want them to imagine they are at home and in terror while a stranger tries to get into the home.
That said, nearly every firearms class urges you to know what you are shooting before pulling the trigger and that simple precaution doesn’t seem possible when you shoot through a door.
You don’t need to wait until you are disarmed before identifying a target at your door.
The case will not be prosecuted – because there is no crime. Everytime something bad happens does not mean a crime is committed. ‘
We do not bring to Jurors cases where there is no crime. There is great value in juries.
But they are not perfect, and it is extremely stupid and immoral to ask them to decide whether a person committed a crime when there is no crime.
We saw this in the idiocy of the Trump case in Manahattan.
JOHN: “We do not bring to Jurors cases where there is no crime.”
ANSWER:
Duke Lacrosse players
George Zimmerman [Trayvon Martin]
Daniel Penny [NY subway hero]
J-6 Defendants
Officer Derek Chauvin [George Floyd]
The Duke players were not brought to trial.
They were charged and only the intervention of the attorney general prevented it. Mike Nifong, the prosecutor, was bringing them to trial and continuing to do so even when it became obvious that they were innoncent. One was photographed at an ATM at the time Nifong said he was raping the prostitute.
I think John’s point was that no effort to prosecute will be made when no crime has occurred and that obviously is not true.
Interesting to include the J-6 defendants who beat police officers, tossed barricades, and shattered windows and broke doors in “no crime” list.
Reckless disregard for human life is popular right now.
Presumably the homeowner called 911 BEFORE the shot meaning alarm. There aren’t fences . The homeowner could have left even with subsection (c) in place.
There is no duty to retreat inside your home – because there are few places in the world you are likely to be safer.
There is no authority to shoot someone outside the locked doors of the home.
Yes, there is.
There is no duty to retreat AT ALL, not just in your home, except in a handful of states, which do not include Indiana. The duty to retreat in public is the exception, not the norm.
31 States
If the homeowner hadn’t gotten so emotional then the woman would be alive.
Burglars don’t fumble with the doorknob of the front door. Any reasoning person would know that.
This guy was looking for an excuse to use his gun to kill a bad person and decided to kill blindly.
Did the homeowner have a camera? There’s a covered porch. They were using lock picks. It was 7AM.
There’s been too much violence. The media and dems are still pushing it. Who’s responsible? No one. Her death is a regular event now.
She was not using lock picks.
She thought she was entering a model home that the developer wanted cleaned for display.
She had a bunch of keys that the developer gave her.
I have to enter hundreds of apartments a year. The management company goes to a great deal of trouble to notify tenants ahead of time, to send someone with me to identify all of us.
To avoid exactly this type of scenario.
If you are attempting to enter another persons home – it is YOUR responsibility to assure that you have the permission of those who legitimately reside their.
You are absolutely wrong about what a reasonable person would conclude \
Like a typical left wing nut, you always want to hold others responsible for the fact that the world is not perfect and that you are sure AFTER THE FACT that you would behave differently.
If you are entering someone’s home the DUTY to prevent this lies with YOU.
If you reverse the duty – you will create far more circumstances where by the time people are allowed to defend themselves – it is too late.
John Say, you are an idiot, who consistently jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts.
Read my comment directly below at 5:02pm.
The cleaners had been hired to go clean a model home at a new development. They went to the wrong address.
They were not entering someone else’s home. They thought it was a model home that the developer wanted to be cleaned for display.
They had no expectation that it was a residence or that someone would be living there.
“John Say, you are an idiot, who consistently jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts.”
We do not disagree on the facts.
And you are the idiot – I am not jumping to conclusions – even without the castle doctrine – mistakes by yourself and or othrs do not create a right to commit a serious crime – breaking and entering an occupied home will get you many years in prison
“The cleaners had been hired to go clean a model home at a new development.”
So ?
“They went to the wrong address.”
Correct – their error and that of the developer – not an error by the home owner.
“They were not entering someone else’s home. ”
Except that is exactly what they were attempting.
“They thought it was a model home that the developer wanted to be cleaned for display.”
Correct, but what they thought to be true does not change reality. This is a common problem with left wing nuts.
“They had no expectation that it was a residence or that someone would be living there.”
So ? That is why they do not have the mens rea needed for the crime of breaking and entering.
But they meet EVERY element of the criminal law for tresspassing and breaking and entering.
Our laws are not perfect, but many – particularly the older ones are a result of centuries of hashing this stuff out.
The homeowner has no way of safely telling whether those trying to enter their house without authorization are doing so as a result of innocent mistake or whether they are intend on harm.
Conversely the cleaners had the means to prevent this – at many steps in the process,
not least of which is “knock and announce” – we expect that out of police serving a warrant against dangerous criminals.
The party with a duty to avoid this was the cleaners.
Miscperceptions and false information do not create rights.
Do we know how many times the cleaners have gone to the wrong house or another cleaner? What’s the protocol used?
Ryan Homes failed to correct their protocol.
Maybe the cleaning couple aren’t qualified to be in neighborhoods with keys, John.
Go fund me makes it clear they’re out for the homeowner’s blood.
Ok, chow
I am not making judgement of the people. Very little has been provided of the people and that is all after the fact and irrelevant.
English is a requirement before employment? California is giving out trucking licenses to non English and two wrecks with death so far.
The occupant didn’t understand–> Ola, Ola, por favor …
The woman did not enter the home. The man used deadly force from the security and safety of his home.
Fake gorilla video. NO ONE would miss the gorilla. Such BS.
Nope. It isn’t fake. It was an interesting psychological experiment and about half the people watching it the first time missed it i did the first time I saw it. It’s legitimate.
once you see the gorilla it does seem astonishing that it could have been missed. But it does happen.
It’s a prank from Harvard to identify the gullible. It’s been rigged with a non repeat algorithm. Tech dept.
The Stupid Force is very strong with you Cricket.
Young, the title says illusion. There’s 2 videos. YOURE GOING TO MISS A GORILLA BEATING ITS CHEST?
I’ll confess. I saw a gorilla carrying a machete.
Young,
When you say, “What a shame that this should happen to decent people all the way around.”, I presume by decent people you mean the cleaning couple.
The shooter was most definitely not “decent people” and nothing simply “happened” to him in some passive manner.
He actively took the premeditated action of shooting blindly though a closed door at someone he had not identified.
Absolutely nothing “happened” to him. He is entirely responsible for his own stupid actions.
“I do think one shouldn’t even have a finger on the trigger, much less pull it, unless you have identified who is on the other end of the barrel and you are are sure you want to kill them. Shooting through a door seems reckless to me. Too easy to make a terrible mistake.”
Sounds reasonable in a bubble. In reality – not so much.
The cleaners here were committing multiple crimes, they were tresspassing, they were attempting to break and enter an occupied home.
What identification is going to make you go “Whew, its safe ?”
Say they had a uniform on ? Criminals impersonate meter readers, and cleaners, and police.
What identification would assure you this was not a criminal ?
And are you going to open your door to check that identification ?
AGAIN – the Duty to get this right rests with those seeking entry NOT the home owner.
There is absolutely no way for the home owner to KNOW that the person at their door is not a criminal unless:
They know them personally.
or they invited them previously or had other reason to expect them.
The main crime of criminal illegals is simply not having immigration documents. At far higher rates than American citizens those who immigrate to the US, documented or not, have far lower rates of criminal behavior. If they seem like they came from some other country it’s a sigh of relief. Recall that the person doing the killing here was an American citizen.
The lower crime rate is a ratio. You probably missed the gorilla?
Or 🦍
Maybe a few actual facts will clarify what happened here.
The shooting occurred at 4283 Maize Lane, in the Heritage development at Whitestown, IN. This is a brand new development open less than a year and still being developed. The woman who was shot and her husband had been hired by Ryan Homes to clean one of their model homes. Ryan Homes gave the couple a key ring with all the keys for their models. Unfortunately, the couple went to the wrong address in a development that is still being built where the street signs and house numbers are not all in place. They were on the front porch fumbling through the keys trying to open the front door.
The occupant called the police saying two Hispanic people were trying to break into his house. Obviously he had been able to see them to be able to identify them as Hispanic, probably because most of the front doors in the development have a window. Most front doors in new developments are steel clad these days because they are cheaper than wood, more durable and easier to maintain. . He shot the woman through the window before the police arrived..
This is straight out murder.
Anon– “This is straight out murder.”
Thanks for the information but I doubt it is murder. Possibly manslaughter.
Brutal home invasions have increased with limp law enforcement and the illegal alien invasions.
Since many come from points south, being Hispanic while trying to get into a stranger’s home is not reassuring, not even to Hispanic homeowners.
Particularly in Democrat jurisdictions [even wealthy parts of LA] people are getting the feeling that they are on their own when it comes to crime and personal safety.
People who brutally invade homes don’t generally stand on the porch fumbling with a bunch of keys. They just kick the door down.
The shooter was obviously able to see what was going on because he identified them as Hispanic in the police call.
He could see what was happening on his porch, and no reasonable person would conclude that a home invasion was underway.
The law requires “reasonable” belief of imminent harm.
Anon– “People who brutally invade homes don’t generally stand on the porch fumbling with a bunch of keys. They just kick the door down.”
How do you know that?
Some home invasions begin with a ‘friendly’ knock on the door to get you to open up.
Also if someone is trying a bunch of keys hoping one will work the assumption is likely to be that they don’t belong inside.
You are assuming things (some untrue or questionable) that lead to your preferred conclusion.
You seem desperate to assign the blame for this shooting to the victim, perhaps because they are immigrants of the wrong color.
You are the one that is “assuming” things.
Your point that some invasions start with a knock is completely and utterly irrelevant to this situation.
Your other point that someone fumbling with keys probably doesn’t belong inside is also completely and utterly irrelevant.
Of course the cleaners didn’t belong inside and that would have been obvious to the home owner. So what exactly is the point of bringing up such a stupid irrelevant comment.
You are simply obfuscating and deflecting in a desperate attempt to blame the victim.
Anon–
Your resorting to the racism argument demolishes any chance of your engaging reasonably with anyone. You aren’t a person with whom one could have a reasonable discussion about different points of view.
You should adopt a name so we can more easily know whom to avoid. But I suppose that is why you are Anonymous…a nonentity.
And here we have the typical MAGA response when confronted with reality. A total inability to respond in a rational way when a nerve is struck.
Attack the commenter, impugn his motives, dismiss the comments because they are made anonymously.
Anything but address the facts.
Of course in MAGA land they are only interested in “alternative facts”.
Young is not a reasonable person. They operate on un-reasoned belief. They don’t want to accept that simply murdering someone who is not a threat is wrong.
Had the situation been reversed, had the cleaners been in a house and they heard the door knob rattle and responded by shooting through the door and killed a confused homeowner who was too preoccupied with someone on their phone or just exhausted from a long day at work, that Young would want those cleaners to get the death penalty.
Young would make all sorts of excuses up – that they aren’t homeowners and therefore could not be defending their home; that sort of distinction. Or they might be immigrants and not legally able to defend their lives.
Essentially, classify them as not sufficiently human to deserve to do what he clearly thinks the shooter in this case was entitled, nearly obligated, to do – kill people he did not know who were no threat to him.
You’re ridiculous.
Estovir did a post of a Groucho Marx show. He did it with purpose. Watch it and see if you agree with estovirs comment. It shows bias if you do perhaps? Maybe estovir hates the Jew Marx? Maybe you’ll think all Spanish speakers are victims?
Sorry I read this post PT. Sorry a woman was shot and sorry it was by a homeowner who didn’t plan on shooting anyone that morning.
“You seem desperate to assign the blame for this shooting to the victim, perhaps because they are immigrants of the wrong color.”
No desparation at all. The “blame” falls on many people – none of which are the home owner.
When you go onto anothers property, go to their porch try to go through their door,
the DUTY to be sure you have permission – is YOURS.
They were given a wrong address – a mistake – but that happens, regardless, not a mistake by th homeowner.
They then entered the property without permission – tresspassing.
And tried to open the door without permission – breaking and entering.
They do not appear to have the required mens rea to be convicted – again – they made a mistake/
But did not knock on the door and announce themselves. And that means that they denied themselves the oportunity to leave safely when they were told they did not have permission to enter.
I do not care if they were white or green.
The whole world is not obligated to protect you from your own mistakes.
BTW I would note that real criminal pretend to be cleaners, real cleaners are even more frequiently actual criminals – though usually petty ones.
There is absolutely no “Obviously” these were not criminals trying to break in.
That was not even close to obvious.
While the vast majority of criminals are stupid and would not break and enter in this way.
All criminals are not stupid – and real crimes happen that are not distinguishable from this.
All criminals TRY to disguise what they are doing – most are just not good at it.
“Your point that some invasions start with a knock is completely and utterly irrelevant to this situation.”
Not at all.
Again the DUTY to enter legally rests with the cleaners – not the home owners.
“Your other point that someone fumbling with keys probably doesn’t belong inside is also completely and utterly irrelevant.”
Fumbling with the keys is not relevant – because it does NOT do anything to change the FACT that the cleaners did not have permission to enter.
“Of course the cleaners didn’t belong inside and that would have been obvious to the home owner.”
Correct – and the duty to get permission before entering belongs to the cleaners.
Not the home owner.
“…. to blame the victim.”
While others are at fault too – whoever gave them the wrong address as an example.
The “victim” did not have permission to be on the yard, to be on the porch, or to try to open the door.
They were illegally trying to enter an occupied building – and that is considered a violent crime.
The only thing protecting the “victim” from criminal prosecution is a lack of Mens Rea.
That is important because in every other way they met the requirements of the law for committing a violent crime.
The only element missing – required mind reading on the part of the home owner to known.
You are the one trying to cast blame where it does not belong.
This is a tragedy – but there is no liability of any kind for the home owner.
You claim his fear was unreasonable – but the only FACT distinguishing the cleaners from actual criminals. was their intent – something the homeowner could not know.
I wouldn’t shoot through a door. I’d sneak out the back and come up behind them, saying stick em up. Then I’d yell help!
“I’d sneak out the back and come up behind them, saying stick em up. Then I’d yell help!”
And ~6 of 10 times you tried to do that to seriously violent home invaders, you would be dead. Of course, you no doubt believe in this case that that would have been an equitable outcome.
No, if they moved I’d shoot them.
Agree.
Agree.
John, they weren’t trespassing. The occupant didn’t have a fence. The front yard as such can be entered by anyone from the street. Jehovahs witnesses and Mormons know that. You’ll need a gated fence and sign. Ask your insurance. At your own risk.
looks like Anonymous (sounds just like George/X) doesn’t know what curtilage means.
On that basis one could tie a shotgun to a chair with a trigger with a string to the door and kill anyone who opens the door.n Your claim is that the homeowner didn’t need to think about it, right? Just if the door might open, kill them.
Is it OK, on the perception of danger when there isn’t any, for a delusional paranoia sufferer to start shooting wildly into a crowd because they think everyone there is a killer zombie alien from outer space? That everyone is out to get them? A clear case of self-defense.
Yet here is a person with complete control of their mental faculties who decided when they got the gun that it was acceptable to kill without knowing who or why or what the threat was; and there was no threat. That was the homeowner’s intent. To kill people he imagined could be a threat (not was a threat) and without any evidence execute them in cold blood.
What makes it “reasonable” is the doorknob. The 911 call.
How long were they fumbling? Long enough for a 911 call.
No race cards. The homeowner is English speaking and the intruders Spanish only.
The homeowner should speak Spanish and this wouldn’t have been.
Holy cow, he’s said 10 x there is no blame. No crime was committed. He was within subsection c.
You bet they do, young. The devil’s introduction is oftentimes polite, charmed.
That’s not how burglars work. There are 10,000 possible keys; they aren’t bringing 10 keys hoping that one works.
It is an unreasonable argument to suggest that they should have knocked and announced themselves and then claim that people knock and who announce themselves as a prelude to commit crimes and therefore whether they knock or not, they are open season targets.
Put up a sign “Paranoid Delusional Homeowner – Will Shoot To Kill ANYONE.”
Burglars carry 100s of garage door openers.
Yes, Ted Bundy didn’t kick doors down, huh?
Trust no one.
“People who brutally invade homes don’t generally stand on the porch fumbling with a bunch of keys. They just kick the door down.”
Really ?
Some test locks to see if they are open.
Some try to pick the lock.
Others come with a large collection of keys – because often homes and cars can be entered if you have the right set of keys.
Sometimes they stole keyrings
Most Doors are not that easy to kick in – despite appearances on TV.
I own apartments. I would never enter an apartment without providing notice to the tenant – especially an occupied apartment. This is ONE of the reasons I would not do that.
BUT I have frequently had to pick the locks of apartments when a tenants has changed the locks and then abandoned the apartment months behind on their rent.
I am not good at picking locks – it takes me several minutes to do so. But I can do it – it is not hard even if you have never done it before – if you have enough time.
I have noted before that my wife is an appelate criminal defense attorney.
Some of her clients are burglars. They do not usually break the door down.
They usually try all the doors and windows looking for one that is not properly locked.
Or they try to jimmy the door with a screw driver or something like a credit card.
They tend not to try to break doors down.
“The shooter was obviously able to see what was going on because he identified them as Hispanic in the police call.”
So ? What was going on looked like a breakin – it looked like one because it WAS.
The ONLY reason the hispanic couple would not have been arrested for attempted breaking and entering if the police had arrived sooner would be because they did not have the requisite intent.
They met all the FACTUAL elements of the crime.
You are expecting the home owner to be able to read their mind.
You also seem to think that you can tell criminals from the law abiding by their appearance.
“He could see what was happening on his porch, and no reasonable person would conclude that a home invasion was underway.”
If you are on someone else’s porch without permission – you are tresspassing,
If you are trying to open their door – you are breaking and entering.
The closer you get to through the exterior door – the more serious the offense and the more dangerous you are presumed to be.
“The law requires “reasonable” belief of imminent harm.”
The home owner has that in spades.
Even door to door salesmen which we do not have anymore do not fiddle with the locks before knocking or ringing the doorbell.
The cleaners unintentionally behave the way that criminals do – not the way that people clearly not committing a crime do.
As noted – I enter hundreds of apartments a year. The building owners notify the tenants atleast 48 hours in advance. They accompany me to the apartments. They ALWAYS knock and announce – even when they know the unit is empty.
These cleaners did NONE of that.
The reason the cleaners “did none of that” is because they thought they were entering an unoccupied model home !!!!
Why can’t you understand this ????
Why are you twisting yourself into a pretzel to try to justify a negligent criminal act by the shooter ????
Any reasonable person who finds someone trying to open his locked front door would simply shout, “Who are you, what do you want”
Reasonable people do not simply assume that it is a home invasion and shoot through a door without some attempt at figuring out what is happening.
What answer would have allowed the home owner to know that he was safe ?
Regardless – “any reasonable person” would knock and announce before entering a potentially occupied space.
Those of you on the left seem to think the fact that the cleaners were told the wrong address changes things.
Would the home owner get off the hook in left wing nut world if someone told him that burglars were going to enter his home ?
If the facts alleged are correct the builders have potentially significant liability.
But just because the cleaners were provided a wrong address does not terminate their duty to not tresspass and not attempt to break and enter an occupied home.
The law does not assign duties based on the color of ones skin.
They are rooted in actual rights, and further in which party can have a duty imposed that avoids ALL possible bad scenarios.
Dunno sweetie, why did Kirk get his throat blown off. Why?
“The reason the cleaners “did none of that” is because they thought they were entering an unoccupied model home !!!!
Why can’t you understand this ????”
Because your errors and the errors of others do not create rights you do not have.
You can not break into someones house because you beleive you have permission – no matter how sincere or justified that beleif is.
“Why are you twisting yourself into a pretzel”
I am not you are.
” to try to justify a negligent criminal act by the shooter ????”
The only way the home owner committed a crime is if he could read their minds.
The facts and the law are simple here without the castle doctrine.
They have been that way for hundreds of years.
We do not impose duties on people that are impossible.
Holding the home owner responsible requires that he can read minds.
There is absolutely nothing the home owner was able to observe that would enable him to distinguish the cleaners from criminals. avoid this.
There were things the cleaners could have done to
I think it’s Matthew 24:17.
If you knew the hour in the night when the robbers would come you’d keep watch…
Adios amigas and amigos
The castle doctrine, anon.
Screw drivers
“They usually try all the doors and windows looking for one that is not properly locked.
Or they try to jimmy the door with a screw driver or something like a credit card.”
And when that fails what do they do? They leave. They don’t want a confrontation from anyone inside. They are not a threat to anyone.
It’s not that you don’t know better, it’s that you use what you know to justify murdering people.
It’s already been said that “knock and announce” is how violent robbers get home owners to open the door. So how would “knock and announce” make a difference here? Isn’t that the way that violent robbers get in, while timid burglars would not do that?
You keep making a better case for giving this homeowner the needle.
A good crowbar will pull the knobs off. Little saw will saw them off . I’m sure it’s easy. Look like a door painter.
How do you know? You have the dispatch call recording? Hispanic? He said they’re speaking Spanish? Get the facts…
Quite the contrary. Cleaning people is a perfect disguise. Window washer is great, too, after you’ve staked out the joint for leave times.
Unless the home owner lured the cleaners to their property this is not manslaughter.
bether the cleaners were hispanic.
This was a tragic accident – but the duty to only enter where you are allowed – rests with the cleaners.
It is possible there is some civil negligence on the part of the developer or cleaning company, or the cleaners themselves. But the homeowner met their burden.
The cleaners were attempting to break and enter. They may not have had the requisite mens rae to be convicted of a crime. But that is all that separates their actions with a crime.
The homeowner was not and is not required to be a mind reader.
It is not their duty to read the mind of the person attempting to break in.
Can we safely say that subsection (c) of the castle law was enacted by the homeowner, John? Can we then say this means the homeowner believes in the implementation of laws and is a law abiding person? There’s nothing in the law itself that prevents shooting through doors.
Are there any other laws that may apply to shooting through doors in the face of a break and enter event?
Lured? Ryan Homes sent them to the gunman’svhome knowing he was trigger happy and would shoot them. Ryan Homes hated the occupant and wanted him gone.
The homeowner is charged with homicide?
Home accident? The occupant has insurance.
Did the Housekeepers Knock on the Door or Ring the Doorbell?
If you didn’t have to correct Key, it would make sense to Knock on the Door or Ring the bell.
Like normal – to see if anyone is home.
Were they carrying their Cleaning Tools and Supplies? Any Ad/Sign on their vehicle? Was there any indication that they were there to Clean?
Were they given instructions on what to do if they could not get into a House/Unit (move on to the next one, call their Manager)?
Did the Development ‘Management Company’ (whom hired the couple) distribute Notices to Owners that Cleaning Contractors will/would be in the area?
A number of People are going to get their pants sued off of them.
Did you even bother to read my post.
The woman and her husband had been hired by the developer to clean one of the model homes.
Unfortunately in the chaos of a brand new development they went to the wrong house.
They were told that they were to clean one of MODEL homes.
People do not live in MODEL homes.
There was absolutely no reason for them to knock or ring the doorbell.
You are just trying to rationalize a criminal act.
PT’S article doesn’t say that. Where’d you read it?
Ah, the contractor is civil liability. Jeez
^^^ no, subcontracted to the Velasquez cleaners who’ll get nothing from either Ryan or the occupant.
The occupant may civil suit Ryan depending…
Did you actually read my post?
No, it would lower my IQ by 10 points.
You = “Did you even bother to read my post.” NO I DIDN’T !
You = “The woman and her husband had been hired by the developer to clean one of the model homes.”
That’s why I commented:
Did the Development ‘Management Company’ (whom hired the couple) distribute Notices to Owners that Cleaning Contractors will/would be in the area?
You = “had been hired by the developer”
Me = “the Development ‘Management Company’ (whom hired the couple)”
You = “There was absolutely no reason for them to knock or ring the doorbell.”
1. Common sense is to Knock (no matter where in the world you are from),
2. A home being Lived-In obviously does not look the same as a Home not being lived in.
(Lived-In: Cars in the Driveway, appearances are not Brand New – It’s being used – i.e.: Inhabited)
(Model Home: Not being used as a Home, appearances are spectacular, It’s not being used – – i.e.: Not Inhabited)
You = “You are just trying to rationalize a criminal act.”
Me = Not at all, only have questions pertaining to the circumstances.
Are you trying to Frame People and Profile and Categorize and them?
Your answer of Yes or No will do.
The cleaners were employees of Ryan Homes who subcontracts for liability purposes.
Did Ryan check license, bond, insurance? 🛠
You’re just ignoring castle law.
Sued? No, the law in Indiana is that a person cannot be civilly sued when acting within the law under subsection c.
It was an attempted unlawful entry covering areas outside of the home itself.
When in Indiana always telephone before arriving and again after arriving requesting an open door or just never go to a stranger’s home at all. Ring the doorbell and step back away from the door.
Got it – Wrongful Death Suit not a venue.
The homeowner could sue Ryan Homes as their negligence set the bsll rolling in this wrongful death. Further, if they are illegal and are employed without proper documentation Ryan Homes is open to prosecution on that isse.
How many American citizens have died from the root cause of illegal interlopers?
Let’s wait for the facts. Full disclosure. The Rios Velasquez family are not forgiving people.
The problem of eye for an eye. Terrible. 🤒 fated…
Anyone ever run up by true criminals will shoot …
Yes, the occupant will sue Ryan Homes and the unlicensed, uninsured cleaners hired by Ryan Homes.
You irresponsibly went from his front door “probably” had window in it, to: “He shot the woman through the window . . .”
You have actual evidence for that claim?
What exactly is your point, apart from trying to rationalize a criminal act.
She was shot through the door. It may or may not have had a window, but most developers in affordable housing developments use steel doors because they are cheaper. He did not shoot through a steel door.
Here is an image of the house.
https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=0921862a250ef5a9&sxsrf=AE3TifOibrmgR3ysB4BKY_uSJVA4N0Xoag:1762729311150&udm=2&fbs=AIIjpHxU7SXXniUZfeShr2fp4giZmZAX1lZM8ZLCSv42N_JL5-DY-Sd2Mjx8f6rZBoGerYoSMBSOlUxedN8n5X7ihUc4u3Y8QjjHNFH0YYwFQakhq1ZNYorP0U7mXz8bwTqyOIXd37nxqXElfuqN7lEGE9VNRjVOa4lMiZWYk8Pa6YCdSvfL-VmTm0HMIF_vaPxGPZHDUuSVgcLJOz9tTkEhvzJqz8IHFg&q=4283+maize+lane+whitestown+indiana&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj_qbSzluaQAxWsBrwBHfwjGpYQtKgLegQIFhAB&biw=1920&bih=929&dpr=1#vhid=qqDJaKsrt51-fM&vssid=mosaic
The front door is recessed under a porch with a roof, so it is not visible from upstairs.
The shooter identified the couple as Hispanic, so he clearly saw them somehow. Most likely there is a window in the door.
“It may or may not have had a window . . .”
Gosh, just a minute ago you were so certain that: “He shot the woman through the window . . .”
Your objectivity and credibility are less than zero.
No criminal intent
Where are you getting your info? He called before or after he shot? Are you positive?
Ryan Homes is negligent. The homeowner was within the law.
The facts you cite make it straight up self defense.
You claim there was a window in the door – windows work both ways.
The cleaners were therefor trying to enter a home that was obviously occupied and therefore not a model.
It is likely they saw and ignored the person with the gun and continued to try to enter anyway.
While it is not fully specified – the facts cited strongly suggest this took place over several minutes
The cleaners tried to enter – the police were called. They continued to try to enter.
If there was a window as you claim – then the cleaners either knew or should have known the home was occupied.
You do not try to enter an occupied home without permission – even if you actually have the right key – unless you have permission.
Even where the there is no castle doctrine – homes are still sacred. Breaking into an occupied home is considered a very serious and violent crime – even if you have no weapon.
You are also totally clueless about the foundations of property rights.
In public we are supposed to retreat if possible – because we have no more right to be wherever we are than the person we perceive as a threat.
Conversely when you are in your home – even without the castle doctrine you generally do not have gthe duty to retreat. Because your property is part of your protection.
People value homes with large front years in the country or suburbs and or with gates and fences – because these are all part of our defenses against those who would be violent.
You are not free to wander across the year of strangers, we call it tresspass – because when you do so you are breeching some of their defenses.
Your door is one of your last lines of defense – YOU get to choose who can enter.
People who live in cities without front yards and fences and gates and ….
trade the other values that cities offer with less physical protection from violence.
City dwellers rely more on police, and less of fences and yards.
The police never arrive soon enough in the city – but they typically arrive far sooner than in the country.
The burden of defending yourself in the country or suburbs rests more on you – BUT your property including the larger buffer zone you have between your door and public spaces is part of your protection.
Typical rambling incoherent mess from the idiot John Say.
Nothing but a series of completely nonsensical irrelevant suppositions.
What would the cleaner see if she looked through the window. She would see a furnished house. Model homes are furnished. She would have no reason to believe that the house was occupied.
If she was fumbling with keys, she almost certainly did NOT look through the window, knock or do any thing else. Why would she. She thought it was an unoccupied model.
She is quite short. She would have been looking down at the bunch of keys that she had been given, and looking down at the lock and being frustrated that none of the keys worked.
There would be no reason for her to look through the window.
However the shooter obviously saw her, because he reported to the police that 2 Hispanic people were trying to get in , BEFORE he shot her.
You are an unmitigated idiot !!!
Is there no possibility the homeowner heard voices speaking in Spanish and concluded there were two Hispanics at the front door. No window needed!
“What would the cleaner see if she looked through the window.”
That it was occupied. Likely based on the facts we have been give she would see a person with a gun.
Regardless, homes – even when people are not home do not look like models.
“She would see a furnished house. Model homes are furnished.”
I do atleast a hundred property inspections a year – models do not look like homes.
Regardless, my point is that you keep trying to impose duties on the home owner that will not work, while avoiding actual duties on the cleaner that will.
” She would have no reason to believe that the house was occupied.”
What she beleves is only relevant to whether she is actually committing a crime.
“If she was fumbling with keys, she almost certainly did NOT look through the window, knock or do any thing else. Why would she. She thought it was an unoccupied model.”
What she thought does not matter.
BTW you KNOCK AND ANNOUNCE before you fumble with the keys.
“She is quite short. She would have been looking down at the bunch of keys that she had been given, and looking down at the lock and being frustrated that none of the keys worked.”
All irrelevant.
“There would be no reason for her to look through the window.”
Except reducing her risk of getting killed.
“However the shooter obviously saw her, because he reported to the police that 2 Hispanic people were trying to get in , BEFORE he shot her.”
Correct. When someone tries to break into your home you may use deadly force to protect your safety.
“You are an unmitigated idiot !!!”
Lets see – the castle doctine allows this.
Before the castle doctrine – hundreds o years of common law allow this.
The determination of which party in a scenario such as this has a duty to act to prevent this was determined correctly centuries ago based on logic and the fact that only one party is capable of acting in a wy to avoid this tragedy 100% of the time.
An you think I am the idiot ?
Your the one on the wrong side of statutory law, common law, history and logic.
In public we are supposed to retreat if possible
Only in a handful of states. Indiana is not one of them.
There is no duty to retreat inside your own home. That was my point.
This was not “in public”.
In those states where there is a duty to retreat in public – that means in public places – roads, sidewalks malls, stores, parks.
It does not mean in your home or even your front yard.
There are complexities because you typically can not use deadly force to defend property.
But that is no absolute. In addition to being a possession SOME property is also protection.
Your yard is protection – you have the right to be there others do not.
Your home is greater protection.
John, you wrote “In public we are supposed to retreat if possible”. That is true only in a handful of states. In almost all states, including Indiana, there is no duty to retreat even in public. So the fact that it wasn’t in public isn’t relevant.
WHERE did you get this information , anon? Police report? Find details on the homeowner. Age, male female etc.
What a lousy report.
You left out, in the US doing jobs Americans won’t do.
*. Best comment so far was anon saying this is a one side report only. The homeowner said reportedly he had nothing to add. Police are investigating. It’s a castle State.
Reminds me of stand at the door and knock. I’ll hear you and open the door. No one knows if there was a knock or doorbell ring? No one answered the door. Christ’s idea was a simple lawful conduct instruction. Don’t barge in, come through the windows, tear off the roof etc. Rush a border, come into a home, nation illegally.
No one knows what video cams will show or what was said at the door. Anyone look up crime rates in the area? This event is bizarre. Electing Jay Jones in Virginia is bizarre, too.
Call before coming over, Jesus, and jehovahs witnesses and Mormons on bikes beware. We aren’t in Kansas anymore.
What Hour/Time of the day was it?
What is the Neighborhood like (Suburban, Inter-City, Rural, Low/High Crime area)?
What is the Demographic makeup of the Area?
What is the Economic Status of the Neighborhood (High Income likely to have House Keepers and Landscapers / Low Income most likely not)?
What is the Economic Status of the Neighborhood (High Income more likely have robberies / Low Income likely not to have robberies)?
Etc.
The News Story is to vague to mitigate factors to a reason why the owner stood their ground.
In other breaking news about the use of lethal force, Turkey issued arrest warrants on Netanyahooo for executing genocide in Gaza. Interesting times we’re living in heh?!
Turkey issued arrest warrants on Netanyahooo for executing genocide in Gaza
If that’s true, Israel could similarly issue arrest warrants for Muslim hajjis like Erdogon, the dictator currently subjugating Turkey who has been arming the Arab hajji terrorists of Hamas for two decades.
Turkey can try to come get Netanyahu while Israel says “Molon Labe”, Mohammad Feckers!
At which point Erdogon and the rest of them better decide to have their aids carry their cellphones for them.
Oh really, turkey? Let’s issue arrest orders to turkey for genocide of Armenians, Greeks, Jewish people, Cypriots.
CFP Article: AG in Istanbul issues arrest warrants for Netanyahu and 36 other high ranking Israeli officials for alleged genocide. Yeah, Turkey? Read the article.
If the homeowner shot through the door, which should be obvious, I’d vote to convict on some variety of homicide charge, and I’d vote against the homeowner in a civil trial. There is absolutely no excuse for blindly shooting through a door, that doesn’t come close to qualifying as “reasonable force” in my book. Reasonable use of force with a gun requires a visible target and an attempt to aim at it. The homeowner could have hit a child walking on the other side of the street. If you are in favor of these types of laws (which I am), it is important strictly judge the limits, even with the benefit of hindsight. Justifying negligent homicide (or worse) on the basis of these laws give heavy ammunition to those that oppose these laws (pun intended).