Burglar forced to clean up his mess at gunpoint


PDA






Zundfolge
October 18, 2007, 07:52 PM
Source (http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071018/NEWS01/710180334)

Burglar made to clean up mess

By Kenneth Mullinax




After a robber cleaned out a Montgomery couple's home, the couple made him clean up -- at gunpoint.

When Adrian and Tiffany McKinnon returned to their Centennial Hill home, the husband and wife discovered that thieves had broke into the Ross Street residence and cleaned the house out of almost everything the family of five owned, said Tiffany McKinnon, crying as she spoke.

"Tears just rolled down my face as I walked in and saw everything gone and piles of trash all over my home," said the woman, who discovered the burglary Tuesday when they went home to prepare for the rest of their family's return after a week away.

Reassuring her that everything would be all right, her husband sent her to her sister's home a block away while he inspected the piles of ransacked items.

It was while he was doing this, making his way back into the sunroom, when she said a man walked in the back door, straight into her husband.

"My husband Adrian caught the thief red-handed in our home," she said, a smile replacing the frown on her face.

"And what is even crazier, the man even had my husband's hat sitting right on his head," she said.

Adrian McKinnon held the suspect -- Tajuan Bullock, 33, of 2963 University Drive -- at gunpoint and told him to sit on the floor until he decided what he was going to do, she said.

"We made this man clean up all the mess he made, piles of stuff, he had thrown out of my drawers and cabinets onto the floor," she said.

Once police arrived, Bullock complained to them about being forced at gunpoint to clean up the home.

"This man had the nerve to raise sand about us making him clean up the mess he made in my house," she said. "The police officer laughed at him when he complained and said anybody else would have shot him dead.

"That made the man shut up."

Police arrested Bullock at 2 p.m. Tuesday on burglary and theft charges, said Capt. Huey Thornton, a Montgomery Police Department spokesman.

Bullock is being held in the Montgomery County Detention Facility on a $30,000 bond.

"The victims were lucky in this case to be able to catch the suspect in the act and hold him until police arrived," Thornton said.

He said this case is unusual because typically a homeowner is away when a burglary occurs and the thief strikes fast so they can sell the items quickly on the street.

In this case, it appears the suspect had returned to the home several times to steal additional items, Thornton said.

The couple began renting the house recently because they wanted a quiet street for their children -- Jasmine, 11; Javontae, 10, and Jamarion, 2 -- to play on, she said.

It turned out the street was too quiet. After they moved in they discovered that none of the homes near theirs were occupied, she said.

"We don't have any neighbors to help watch our house because it's like a ghost town here except when the church is meeting across the street," Tiffany McKinnon said Wednesday.

She probably wouldn't describe what happened as lucky.

When she walked in her home on Tuesday, almost every piece of furniture she owned was missing. She said thieves had taken her dining and living room furniture, electronics, clothes and even the pots and pans out of her kitchen cabinets.

"I was just in a state of shock because me and my husband both work hard and now most everything is gone," McKinnon said, biting her lip.

What hurts her most is what thieves stole from her children.

"They took every stitch of all my baby's clothes except what we took to my momma's house," she said. "They even took their toys."

Still, there is one thing that can bring a smile to her face. At least she had help cleaning the house.


:D

If you enjoyed reading about "Burglar forced to clean up his mess at gunpoint" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
kingpin008
October 18, 2007, 08:55 PM
Awesome. Should'a made the bastard put on a frilly pink maid's outfit while he was doing it. They'd love that down at the local jailhouse. :evil:

MilsurpShooter
October 18, 2007, 08:59 PM
Wait officer, don't take him yet, he hasn't finished the bathroom :D

.cheese.
October 18, 2007, 09:24 PM
legally - you can't do this correct?

doesn't it become kidnapping or something, or being held against your will...

not that I think the homeowners were wrong.... I just have a feeling it was technically illegal.

bannockburn
October 18, 2007, 09:44 PM
Well, he is trespassing on your private property, and has been caught in the act of breaking and entering, and in possesion of stolen goods; you're holding him at gunpoint would probably be seen as a citizen's arrest of a felony suspect. However, I personally don't like the idea of the suspect moving around while he's under "house arrest". Too many things that could go wrong, plus what happens if any of his "buddies" stop by to help with the looting; maybe they forgot to check for any copper plumbing to steal? No, I think I would just have him prone on the floor, hands on his head till the police get there.

Jorg Nysgerrig
October 18, 2007, 09:54 PM
Eh, might be violating Alabama law Section 15-10-7: It is the duty of any private person, having arrested another for the commission of any public offense, to take him without unnecessary delay before a judge or magistrate, or to deliver him to some one of the officers specified in Section 15-10-1, who must forthwith take him before a judge or magistrate.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find a DA willing to file charged for the "unnecessary delay".

Pigspitter
October 18, 2007, 10:03 PM
I've always wanted a cleaner where the power off switch was a trigger. that's when they work real good.

Officers'Wife
October 18, 2007, 10:09 PM
As Truman was reported to have said once...

Yes, it's illegal but why spoil the beauty of it.

Or maybe even more appros is Gilbert and Sullivan- Let the punishment fit the crime... tra la... let the punishment fit the crime.

Selena

joab
October 18, 2007, 10:11 PM
Is there a changing sentiment in America or are forum members just getting better at finding stories about homeowners fighting back shown in a positive light these days

Pilgrim
October 18, 2007, 10:12 PM
legally - you can't do this correct?

doesn't it become kidnapping or something, or being held against your will...

not that I think the homeowners were wrong.... I just have a feeling it was technically illegal.
I suppose a prosecutor who is really a jerk could charge the homeowner with false imprisonment.

Pilgrim

RoadkingLarry
October 18, 2007, 10:12 PM
Sad part is the homeowner will probably get sued and lose.

Geno
October 18, 2007, 10:21 PM
What's the guy's beef, he got to be "the-maid-of-Honor". Baha!

We could say in the end the thief "really-cleaned-up!" Hahaha!

Doc2005

Standing Wolf
October 18, 2007, 10:21 PM
Once police arrived, Bullock complained to them about being forced at gunpoint to clean up the home.

If I were the judge, I'd give him an extra five years to reconsider the arrogance of his complaint.

buttrap
October 18, 2007, 11:21 PM
Looks legal to me. The guy called the cops and he did have the right to keep the hood restrained or under control till the cops showed. Really splitting hairs if its tied up,locked up or worked up.:rolleyes:

Griff
October 19, 2007, 12:51 AM
The stones this home owner showed by getting some instant revenge are not accessible to those who second guess themselves in such situations. We can learn from his example, though.

When my mother's home was burglarized, she told us that it was not the actual value of the stolen objects that had her twisted up in knots, but the intangible principal of the act. She no longer felt safe in her house. This man has not only caught the thief, but also regained a lot of his dignity and self respect by virtue of his actions, not by proxy of some far off court ruling. Good job, Sir!

I'd be willing to bet that most cops understand this on the same level, and are glad to see it. I think that its a common sense issue, though. Go too far, and they won't be able to turn a blind eye for the good guys. He did the right thing, and I'm glad you posted this.

Cheers, Y'all

iiibdsiil
October 19, 2007, 02:10 AM
Good story! The cop laughing at him makes it even better!

Sheldon J
October 19, 2007, 12:27 PM
Don't call the police yet, the house needs a second coat of paint!

2ndamd
October 19, 2007, 02:13 PM
Hahaha! LOL!
Take that you POS!

MarshallDodge
October 19, 2007, 03:12 PM
Too funny!

I would have been hard pressed not to shoot the guy. Hopefully he does not come back for revenge when he gets out.

mrreynolds
October 19, 2007, 03:59 PM
He would have made me a pot roast with home made gravy before it was over.

plexreticle
October 19, 2007, 04:07 PM
This is a funny story but poor judgment on the homeowner part.

MinnMooney
October 19, 2007, 04:12 PM
Awesome. Should'a made the bastard put on a frilly pink maid's outfit while he was doing it. They'd love that down at the local jailhouse.

I saw this on the news late last night, also. What a hoot..... until you realize that the burglar/jerk might hire a lawyer and sue the homeowner. I think that judges should take this case to heart and think about restitution where they have to work for their victims. Me thinks that not too many victims would want the perp around anymore.... except this particular, ballsy homeowner!!

dhoomonyou
October 19, 2007, 05:12 PM
I can hear the perp's lawyer now:

"Your Honor I move for dismissal on grounds of unlawful imprisonment, and my client will be suing the homeowner in Civil court for 50 million dollars for mental anguish".

RPCVYemen
October 19, 2007, 05:28 PM
This is a funny story but poor judgment on the homeowner part.

I agree - poor idea legally and tactically.

Poor idea legally, because the legal use of lethal it not to force someone else to do your will, or to punish them. The legal use of lethal force is to prevent someone from causing you or someone else serious bodily injury or death. If the burglar had refused to do the cleanup, and the homeowner had shot him, ...

Adrian McKinnon held the suspect -- Tajuan Bullock, 33, of 2963 University Drive -- at gunpoint and told him to sit on the floor until he decided what he was going to do, she said.

If the homeowner said anything like, "Sit there until I decide what to do with you!", let's hope those words don't come back to haunt him in a court of law. Now he'll have to deal with the word of his wife in print that he threatened to use the gun against the burglar when there was absolutely no further threat to he or his wife.

Tactically, it's hard to think of a worse idea than ordering a criminal who you've got sitting on the ground to get up and walk around with items in hand hand. When I have seen police in person (and on Court TV :) ) dealing with a suspect, they want him on the ground in a hurry - with nothing in hands. And they cuff as fast as possible. They don't even want him moving until they have he cuffs on him. Even then, the seem to keep at least one had on the cuffs - I think to establish control.

The last thing they way - apparently - is a suspect up and walking around, out of control. And they sure don't want anything his hands.

Looks to me like they want to establish physical control quickly and maintain it until the suspect in locked in a vehicle of some kind. Maybe a LEO who read this can comment on the protocol for detaining a suspect?

Asking someone to pick up books and drawers and a mop or broom doesn't seem like a good idea tactically. Any item can be thrown as the commencement of an attack.

No, I think I would just have him prone on the floor, hands on his head till the police get there.

This sort of makes sense - though LEO friends in the past have told me that "holding" someone at gunpoint who is not cuffed is far more difficult and dangerous than it looks. Evidently people who do crime for a living can move very fast.

I am not a career criminal - if someone points a gun at me, I'd crap in my pants. A career criminal may be thinking, "That's a nice gun. I can get top dollar for that. I can take that wussy guy, gun or no gun. I can get me a gun."

[QUOTE"The police officer laughed at him when he complained and said anybody else would have shot him dead."[/QUOTE]

Let's hope the police officer has the last laugh. My guess is not. My guess is that an attorney make a plausible case that the homeowner was in fact seeking to punish the criminal, not just detain him. Forced labor is illegal, etc.

I hope a jury would not find in favor of the criminal - but getting to that point could very very expensive for the homeowner. He probably could have hired the most expensive clean up crew in the city, and remodeled his house for what a suit will cost him - even if he loses.

Mike

RPCVYemen
October 19, 2007, 05:30 PM
This is a funny story but poor judgment on the homeowner part.

I agree - poor idea legally and tactically.

Poor idea legally, because the legal use of lethal it not to force someone else to do your will, or to punish them. The legal use of lethal force is to prevent someone from causing you or someone else serious bodily injury or death. If the burglar had refused to do the cleanup, and the homeowner had shot him, ...

Adrian McKinnon held the suspect -- Tajuan Bullock, 33, of 2963 University Drive -- at gunpoint and told him to sit on the floor until he decided what he was going to do, she said.

If the homeowner said anything like, "Sit there until I decide what to do with you!", let's hope those words don't come back to haunt him in a court of law. Now he'll have to deal with the word of his wife in print that he threatened to use the gun against the burglar when there was absolutely no further threat to he or his wife.

Tactically, it's hard to think of a worse idea than ordering a criminal who you've got sitting on the ground to get up and walk around with items in his his hands. You are asking him to pickup potential weapons, aren't you?

When I have seen police in person (and on Court TV :) ) dealing with a suspect, they want him on the ground in a hurry - with nothing in hands. And they cuff as fast as possible. They don't even want him moving until they have he cuffs on him. Even then, the seem to keep at least one had on the cuffs - I think to establish control.

The last thing they way - apparently - is a suspect up and walking around, out of control. And they sure don't want anything his hands.

Looks to me - and I don't know this - like they want to establish physical control quickly and maintain it until the suspect in locked in a vehicle of some kind. Maybe a LEO who read this can comment on the protocol for detaining a suspect?

Asking someone to pick up books and drawers and a mop or broom doesn't seem like a good idea tactically. Any item can be thrown as the commencement of an attack.

No, I think I would just have him prone on the floor, hands on his head till the police get there.

This sort of makes sense - though LEO friends in the past have told me that "holding" someone at gunpoint who is not cuffed is far more difficult and dangerous than it looks. Evidently people who do crime for a living can move very fast.

I am not a career criminal - if someone points a gun at me, I'd crap in my pants. A career criminal may be thinking, "That's a nice gun. I can get top dollar for that. I can take that wussy guy, gun or no gun. I can get me a gun."

"The police officer laughed at him when he complained and said anybody else would have shot him dead."

Let's hope the police officer has the last laugh. My guess is not. My guess is that an attorney make a plausible case that the homeowner was in fact seeking to punish the criminal, not just detain him. Forced labor is illegal, etc.

I hope a jury would not find in favor of the criminal - but getting to that point could very very expensive for the homeowner. He probably could have hired the most expensive clean up crew in the city, and remodeled his house for what a suit will cost him - even if he wins.

Mike

Crunker1337
October 19, 2007, 06:25 PM
I suppose it's technically illegal, but no reasonable person would press charges. I guess the robber should think about it as an out-of-court agreement.

MT GUNNY
October 20, 2007, 12:24 AM
Jorg

If the owner didnt tell him he was under citizen arrest then that law doesnt apply.

Jorg Nysgerrig
October 20, 2007, 03:06 AM
If the owner didnt tell him he was under citizen arrest then that law doesnt apply.

I'm not sure I agree with that. Alabama Code 15-10-7 (c): A private person must, at the time of the arrest, inform the person to be arrested of the cause thereof, except when such person is in the actual commission of an offense, or arrested on pursuit. It certainly seems like it would be considered an arrest since he was commiting the offense at the time.

By the same token, if you claim the statutes regarding arrest by a private person doesn't apply, by what legal authority did he detain the guy? If it wasn't a legal arrest, how would it not be unlawful imprisonment under Alabama law?

It seems like you either have to legally detain the guy under the private person arrest law or illegaly detain him under the unlawful imprisonment law. What am I missing?

JWarren
October 20, 2007, 09:32 AM
One thing that no one has considered in this:

Do we KNOW the time-lapse between catching the criminal and calling the police?" "Do we know the time it took for the police to get there?" "Do we know how long the homeowner actually had possession of the criminal?"


Now, from the article, it appears that this occured in the city of Montgomery-- and I suspect it wasn't out in a rural area-- being University Drive. While I would expect a police response fairly quickly in the city limits, that is still by no way assured.

Where I live, a 911 response will not arrive for at least 20 minutes-- plan on over 30 minutes.

That means that I can count on holding this guy for half an hour. I think cleaning his mess is a lot more constructive use of time than chatting and making small talk.


While I agree that having a guy up is tactically unsound, I can see how the situation could be controlled depending on the lay of the floorplan.

But I think I'd have had him on the ground. The guy isn't going to be doing a great cleaning job, and you don't know if he has other weapons.

Making a point to a criminal isn't worth your life. And the point would most likely be lost on him.



But my point is this....


The homeowners COULD have had the guy clean up as they are waiting for the police. In that case, none of the issues brought to light on this thread come into play. While looking over the case is a good idea for hypotheticals, we are in no position to make any conclusions about the homeowners actions. We simply don't have enough information for that.


-- John

buttflyzzz
October 20, 2007, 12:30 PM
I hope if im ever in the same situation i would have the restraint of not shooting him. but he better not move to fast, im sure i would be a little edgy to say the least

RPCVYemen
October 20, 2007, 09:02 PM
I hope if im ever in the same situation i would have the restraint of not shooting him.

If you shot him while he was cleaning up at gunpoint, my guess is that you very likely be looking at time.

Mike

RPCVYemen
October 20, 2007, 09:05 PM
The guy isn't going to be doing a great cleaning job, and you don't know if he has other weapons.

I thought of that, too. The homeowner didn't say anything about searching the burglar. And I don't think you ever want to get that close to an uncuffed criminal while you are holding a gun.

Mike

Dallas Jack
October 21, 2007, 02:40 AM
Love a happy ending.
Dallas Jack

If you enjoyed reading about "Burglar forced to clean up his mess at gunpoint" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!