Cali Homeowner Shoots Home Invader, Ditches Body

[crushbup]

Here's the real issue I have with the story:
reports of shots fired and it takes the cops 6 hours to show up? That's disgusting, and it does illustrate how a gun for home defense can be vital (I refrain from comment on these circumstances, not enough info and there are many extenuating circumstances)

He stopped shooting too soon or the shotgun wielding perp would not have been "injured".

He stopped the goblin. That's what's important.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

i wonder what else is left out. was it a plain jane invaision? or was someone selling a lil dope. might explain the need to clean up and hide

 

[FieroCDSP]

A lot of things in this story are strange. Maybe he got a waive on prosecution for tossing a few of his old drug connections under the bus. Regardless, if he's out and free, they're either losing their razor edge against guns or he really is the luckiest guy ever. He should buy a lotto ticket, just in case.

 

[Yosemite**Sam]

And police said the burglar, Rotela, "Could face charges".

Oh, my. Why would the State of California (my home state) ever wish to file charges on such a nice man. After all, he didn't shoot anybody.

First off he needs to survive in order for the state to prosecute him.

Secondly, if he is arrested then the local municipality making the arrest is responsible for the injured person's medical bills. Right now he is a being cared for by the state and probably county budgets. Basically the state tax payers are paying the bill for the person who was shot. If he survives the agency having jurisdiction will eventually arrest him.

Also if he is arrested and he remains in custody the arresting agency must provide security for the injured while he is hospitalized. Once again a burden to the tax payers.

 

[ants]

Thanks, Sam. That's interesting to know.

 

[packnrat]

S.S.S.

but then again there is allways a way for them to find out what happend.. look at what csi on tv can do in 1/2 hour.


.

 

[Defensory]

I've got a theory as to why the shooter wasn't prosecuted.

The liberals who run the state of California have a well deserved reputation for being extremely soft on criminals and crime in general.

The shooter was a convicted felon, thus a "good" guy by Cal-Lib standards, so they gave him a wink and a nod.

Now if the shooter had been a lifelong law-abiding citizen with a squeaky clean record, they would've arrested and charged him with everything possible, and prosecuted him to the fullest extent of the law.

 

[Soybomb]

He stopped shooting too soon or the shotgun wielding perp would not have been "injured".

Somehow I doubt evidence of him executing a man on the floor would have helped his case, but it is the internet....

This event just illustrates something thats wrong with the system. A man defended himself in his own home and was so afraid he would be portrayed as the bad guy that he did something dumb.

 

[kevindsingleton]

Either too soon, or not enough gun.

That's how we did it in Texas, any way!

Odd story. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

 

[big_bang]

reports of shots fired and it takes the cops 6 hours to show up?

I just guessing that his buddy who got away freaked out for a while, then made an anonymous 911 call.

Strange story, indeed...

 

[paramedic70002]

That news story had a couple holes in it.

Several years ago Mas Ayoob did a story on a guy in a good shoot, but ran away in fear. Eventually got a long prison sentence. Seems most courts consider flight to be an insurmountable admission of guilt. Weird.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Seems most courts consider flight to be an insurmountable admission of guilt. Weird.

This never got to court. I suspect you are right that if this actually went to trial he'd hang, but there will be no trial.

 

[Thernlund]

That story was surreal. And out of California, too!

Ooof.


-T.

 

[mp510]

This reminds me of Bernie Goetz- another case where a minor gun technicality lead to a righteous self defense shooting being murcied and evidence being tampered with- because the shooter was afraid to come forward.

 

[scrat]

Confused. oh well

 

[Guns and more]

Call me crazy, but when I read stories that don't add up, especially in California, my first reaction is, "Was the perp an illegal?". Doesn't say, but often the press leaves out those little details.

 

[anarchris]

I can't wait for the movie

 

[Dustinthewind]

Guy has a felony drug conviction. I would bet that he threw some big fish under the bus.

 

[gym]

It's those darn gun laws they have there in CA. They confused him.

 

[Zoogster]

The guy is facing felony charges either way. Felon in possession of a gun by going the legal route and reporting the incident, or charges stemming from murdering the individual or hiding the crime.

What would you do if you somehow became prohibited? Sure should never happen, but what if your happy relationship went bad and wife or girlfriend falsely had you arrested for domestic violence?
Never say never.


Now this guy lives with 5 people, had 2 robbers one of whom got away. He had at least 6 people besides the shot individual that knew what happened, so there was no chance he wouldn't eventualy have to answer for the incident.

However consider his options: Several years for possession the firearm illegaly more than likely (very surprised he has not been charged) or a 0 years/life sentence gamble.
The no sentence/life sentence gamble would be hard not to consider in that situation, especialy with no witnesses.

He is a prohibited person for a non violent conviction 9+ years ago.
Prohibited classes make for some interesting situations.

 

[Eyesac]

This is by far the weirdest story I've read on this forum. hands down. What's even weirder is the reponse from the LE...?

 

[Zoogster]

This is by far the weirdest story I've read on this forum. hands down. What's even weirder is the reponse from the LE...?

I am also very surprised an individual with obviously a serious injury if paralyzed, survived 6 hours with no medical help, in a weakened state losing blood, and put out in the elements.



It is certainly wierd all around. Yet it might actualy encourage prohibited persons, of which there is a lot in some inner city areas to be more inclined to involve the police in gang shootings. Currently they essentialy have to deal with it on thier own, and even be thier own deterent (with retaliations) because they have little legal avenues.

In fact in light of that line of logic I can even see prohibited persons justifying offensive attacks on those that might attack them (like gang members.) If they wait to be attacked, it will be at thier attackers choosing, probably at a place tied to the target, or in front of witnesses (even if attackers identity hidden or they flee in a vehicle.
So if the prohibited person illegaly defends with a firearm against the attackers who likely have firearms, they face prosecution. Yet if they go offensive they could choose the time and place, and a situation more favorable to getting away with the act could be done.

Yes prohibited classes sure create some interesting logic.

The prosecutors choice to not file charges could result in more LEO cooperation in the area when people are involved in good shoots they were not legaly allowed to make.

I just hope I never get branded prohibited and have to deal with such decisions myself.

 

[KelVarnson]

I don't think the article said Nichols owned the gun, did it? It could have belonged to one of his roomates. His using the gun (in his own home) would not be illegal in and of itself, would it?

 

[Zoogster]

don't think the article said Nichols owned the gun, did it? It could have belonged to one of his roomates. His using the gun (in his own home) would not be illegal in and of itself, would it?

Questionable. Felon in possession is illegal. He is the owner of the place everyone lives. He obviously has easy access to the firearm if he can just grab it at a moment's notice because he hears noises.

I would venture that it was his firearm, or one that for all intents and purposes was under his control illegaly.

He armed himself with a gun, "just in case something got out of hand," and went to find the source of the noise

I saw a shooting on Court TV where the shooter was involved in a shooting in the home.
One of the individuals, the home owner, recieved 7 years just for being a felon in possession of a firearm even though they were not found guilty of any other charges.
It happened at a party, but the only charge that stuck was the illegal possession by a prohibited person.

 

[akodo]

The only thing I can think of is that the burglar admitted to not wanting to live if paralyzed, and asking to be laid out under the stars.

I suspect that part might be a tall tale, but if it is true, you have 'dying wish' vs 'call ambulance' neither of which is quite the same thing as the NY subway shooter who came back, and shot a downed criminal a few more times.

I guess in theory, man A comes across man B about to die, man B asks to be left to die, only brought outside to see the stars. Would it be a crime for man A to grant that wish and not call the ambulance? I think not.

Of course, man A causing man B to be at death's door, I'd say 'screw you B, I'm calling the ambulance just to cover my own backside!' but then I am not a felon.