consequences of not being sure of your target...

[Hangingrock]

Conjecture-conjecture we don’t know what we don’t know applies. If the deceased had not been the man’s son but a violent criminal then the commentary would be most likely completely different pertaining to this subject.

 

[gojuice101]

Without being there, it is difficult to know exactly what happened. I can see where there could have been a threat perceived. If someone was snooping around the house in black with a mask and something that appeared to be a weapon, then that's that. Obviously I agree that you should be aware of your target, but if you spend too much time analyzing the situation, it can turn bad. What if it had been a violent person? Spending time trying to determine who it was could have turned out very bad for the shooter.

The fact that it was his son complicates things, but we also don't know the situation there. Years ago, I knew someone whose son broke in and beat him almost to death with a baseball bat. Therefore, simply because its his son doesn't mean that a threat wasn't there.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by BBQLS1: I agree that he may not be in the right according to state laws. I just don't understand the comments the he broke one of the safety rules by not identifying his target.

Nor do I.

Posted by dayhiker: By responding to the call for help from the neighbor the father was privileged to be on the property.

True, but irrelevant.

He used deadly force in defense of another (the woman) since forced entry into a home itself is a crime of violence.

Well the father felt the "need" to use deadly force, whether in defense of himself, the woman,or to prevent a crime of violence.

He went out after a neighbor said that she believed that her house was being broken into.

He now has the task of presenting evidence regarding what he knew at the time, and it will be decided by others whether a reasonable person, knowing what he knew at the time, would have believed that he had had no alternative to the use of deadly force.

The fact that it was not his dwelling will likely complicate his case.

I do not "need" to give an armed trespasser a sporting chance here in CT.

Do not believe for a moment that the law would excuse the use of deadly force to prevent or terminate trespass.

Posted by X-Rap: I say reserve judgement until investigation proves the son didn't have violent criminal intent toward the neighbor.

The son's intent will not really affect the question of justification.

To hold him in judgement because he answered her plea for help without us knowing more facts is wrong, at what point would someone be justified in going to the aid of a neighbor?

He will not be judged for aiding a neighbor.

I would aid a neighbor under such circumstances--by confirming that the police had been called, by advising her when I would arrive, by staying on the sidewalk while walking very alertly with my firearm concealed, and by going into her house to defend her should it become necessary.

I would not go "outside to investigate." All downside, no upside.

 

[Kendahl]

The incident with the Japanese student occurred in Oklahoma. The student was looking for a party and already drunk. He entered a home without being invited and confronted the wife. There had been several home invasions and the wife started screaming. Her husband, gun in hand, ran to to aid, saw the student, assumed it was another invasion, and shot the student dead. The shooting was ruled justifiable. The student's parents talked about suing the husband but I don't know if they did or how it ended.

Many years ago, a local cop responded to a business burglary in the middle of the night. When the burglar turned toward him with a shiny object in his hand, the cop shot him dead. It was ruled a good shoot. The burglar's sister sued for wrongful death. She lost.

I think the outcome in Connecticut would have been the same whether the first responder was the father or a police officer.

 

[beatledog7]

I'll stick by my original analysis based on what we read here, though I certainly agree with those who say we don't have everything. Nor will we ever.

We will learn more as the case unfolds, no doubt. The story as presented smells really bad. There is simply no way the shooter needed to go outside and carry out a vigilante-style investigation which led him to shoot while the supposed threat was still outside the "victim's" house. The victim of the attempted break-in (that's what we're told this was, just an attempted break-in) turns out to be the shooter's sister, the perp's aunt. Smells really bad.

I have no explanation at all for why the son would be creeping around his aunt's house in the dark in burglar wear, and trying to break in. Seems he would have been able to simply knock and be granted entry. Smells really bad.

 

[Sinus Infection]

I don't want to be mean or offensive or anything, but this wouldn't have happened in another country, where firearms are forbidden to citizens.
Guns don't protect people, it hurts people, and in this case it did more than just kill a person, it killed a son of the man who shot him.

 

[beatledog7]

Troll response:

In a country where guns are forbidden to citizens, the young man may well have gotten in the house, killed its occupants, and left with their jewelry and X-Box. You like that better?

 

[bikerdoc]

Tragic story with simply lessons
Cops get paid to clear houses and search/recon perimeters.
Civilians defend thresh holds, preferably one room with a good choke point.
Call 911 is first, hunker down and defend is second.
Wandering around outside is not a viable option.

 

[RmB]

Not trying to be a conspiracy theorist, but this smells extremely fishy.

First of all: The kid had ONE gunshot wound, to the head. Would adrenaline not make you empty your mag or cylinder?

He was wearing a black ski mask and it was dark outside, it is odd that he would get a headshot. Besides that, the fact that he got a headshot, means that the possibility that the kid was approaching the shooter is very low.

Hitting a target in the dark, getting a one shot stop, and the fact that one shot stop was to the head, makes this pretty odd to me.

Does anyone know how many shots were fired before he hit the kid, or after he hit the kid? Im sure more news is to come.

 

[mnrivrat]

A confrontation occurred, state police said. The man dressed in black approached Jeffrey Giuliano in a "threatening manner" and Jeffrey Giuliano feared he was about to be assaulted with the knife, police said. Jeffrey Giuliano then opened fire and struck the assailant multiple times, including in the head.

When state police from the Southbury barracks arrived moments later, they found Jeffrey Giuliano sitting on the grass. He was dressed in a t-shirt and shorts. His son lay dead in the driveway, the knife still in his hand.

Did anybody bother to read the rest of the story ?

 

[1911Tuner]

Given the information available, my 2% of a buck...

A man responds to a distress call of a prowler/intruder who is unidentifiable in the dark due to a ski mask in warm weather.

If it walks like a duck...

Teenager...whether he's pulling a prank on the neighbor or has intent to commit a crime, very likely recognizes his father and knows that he will likely be armed...and he moves toward him with an unidentifiable object in his hand that could easily be mistaken for a weapon if not actually intended to be used as a weapon.

Bad move, Kid. Really bad. Life is harder when you're stupid.

An audible exclamation of: "Whoa Dad! It's me! Junior! Don't shoot me!" would have ended it right there. Junior may have been grounded at the very worst, and taken a tongue-lashing from Dad at the least.

But Junior got stupid and he kept being stupid through the whole drama. Junior brought it on himself, and now dad has to live with the fact that he killed his own son. Very tragic.

 

[Fred Fuller]

I've been watching this story evolve for a while and I'm prone to agree - there's just not enough information in the news stories to draw any useful conclusions at this point. Perhaps the ongoing investigation will reveal more details that prove useful in sorting things out, perhaps not.

As with most news-based threads in ST&T, we need to avoid attempting analysis that is not supported by available data...

 

[bikerdoc]

This might shed a little more insight.

I still stand by what I said in post 33

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/29/connecticut-teen-fatally-shot-by-dad-called-good-kid/

 

[j1]

If you act in a dangerous and stupid manner "accidents" will happen.

 

[Kleanbore]

This account in the Toronto Sun states that, according to a police statement, the shooter said that he was in fact approached by the boy and believed that boy was about to attack him.

We still do not know enough about the facts, or about the father's intentions, to draw any conclusions about the event from a legal standpoint.

We do know that a tragedy occurred, and that underscores what we have long said in the ST&T forum: that going out to investigate a potential criminal act entails great risks.

Did the father go looking for the intruder? If so, the tragedy could have been avoided. That is usually a very poor idea.

Was he simply on his way to his sister's house? If so, that underscores the need for situational awareness even more.

We do not know.

 

[JRWhit]

A lot about this story doesn't make sense. But I lets not talk like He saw something shiny that could have been a weapon. It was a weapon. There is no disputing that. Fact is some of us would respond to protect our sister in distress while others may not see it a needed action but suggest to call police and wait. To each his own. With all of us being from different states it's hard to say what will happen with the case since all of our laws are different. Our emotions urge us to find an error in occurrence due to the horrific outcome. I cannot say with the current facts provided on the story,that I would not have sensed a level of danger that required response. And I'll be damned, if I got a call like that from my sister, that I would just sit there and wait for police as I would be more concerned with her safety than my own. If you respond to that and you walk up on a man in a ski mask with a knife, I think it unreasonable to assume that he is there for reasons other than ill intent. This is a horrific outcome that I wouldn't wish on anyone. But I can not in good faith honestly say I would have done any different. I may like to think I would, but probably wouldn't.


On the other end of this though, This doesn't pass the smell test. I think there is something else going on here. Armed robbery is not something you just start doing all of a sudden. This is very strange and I'm a little suspect that this could turn into a cover for murder,or some other accident. Don't ask me why,we all know there's some screwed up people out there.

 

[bikerdoc]

We do not know.

Insightful and thought provoking.

Neither did he.

Which only strengthen's my belief that the mission of Strategy and Tactics is to educate ourselves, and those around us, in proven proper procedure and mindset within the framework of our local jurisdictions.

ETA; I have an inclination to agree with JRWITT there is an unknown smelly element, and I want more info on the circumstances and effects of the adoption. but in the absense of hard fact, it remains in the realm of speculation and therefore off topic.

 

[SSN Vet]

this may shed some light on the situation...

14-year-old friend, said he and Tyler were playing an online game called Minecraft while talking and laughing together via Skype until about 10 p.m.

apparently, in the advanced level of minecraft, you build your fortress out of blocks and then at night monsters come out and attack you.

Hmmmmm.........

I talked to my kids about this story this a.m., and told them that "daddy has guns, but guns are not play things. Some kids play video games where they run around and shoot people, but your father does not approve and will not have these kind of games in the house."

kind of a moot point... I have all girls and they are not in the least bit interested in guns.

 

[1911Tuner]

On the other end of this though, This doesn't pass the smell test. I think there is something else going on here. Armed robbery is not something you just start doing all of a sudden.

They all start sometime. Maybe this was his debut.

But, yeah. There are probably a few factors that we don't know yet. That's usually the case.

But...

The kid put on a ski mask and went lurkin' around. Maybe he's a peeper. Maybe he's more. He's unquestionably stupid.

Stupid.

Life is harder when you're stupid. Sometimes, it's also quite a bit shorter.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by bikerdoc: Which only strengthen's my belief that the mission of Strategy and Tactics is to educate ourselves, and those around us, in proven proper procedure and mindset within the framework of our local jurisdictions.

Amen!

Your post #33 is a constructive contribution toward that end.

 

[X-Rap]

Reading over the news accounts it sounds like there indeed was a weapon and burglar apparel. It also says there was another local break in that had the neighbors spooked.
The body was in the driveway so it may well be the case that the brother was headed for the sisters front door and met the kid as he was headed up the lane.
When I was young my grandparents lived adjacent to his mothers and later his sisters house, in their case to get from one door to the other was a straight shot on a path between two big spruce trees on the property line. Speculation of the correct way to access one property from the other without some diagrams or photos is a shot in the dark at best. Maybe someone will bring up a Google Earth picture.
There is no doubt much more to this story, was the kid an undiscovered criminal, was the other neighborhood break in violent in nature if it had the neighbors spooked? Did the sister have items of extreme value that the boy may have known about? Were drugs involved? Did the father have Ill intent? We may never know unless the outcome is as spectacular as the incident. I will say that the premise of rule 4 violation doesn't seem right to me.

 

[Manco]

We do know that a tragedy occurred, and that underscores what we have long said in the ST&T forum: that going out to investigate a potential criminal act entails great risks.

True, but waiting for the police when one's sister is potentially in mortal danger also entails risks (assuming for the sake of argument here that she was unarmed). As with so many things, the "devil is in the details"--in this case, the question is how immediate and severe the threat really was. Did she simply detect somebody moving around the house, and nothing more? This may not warrant having a family member take a big risk to come over. On the other hand, if somebody were kicking in her door, that would be different. Actually spotting a masked prowler holding a knife may also present a serious-enough threat that a caring brother (speaking in general) may not be able to ignore (in favor of waiting for the police).

Did the father go looking for the intruder? If so, the tragedy could have been avoided. That is usually a very poor idea.

For all we know, however, it may simply have been replaced by a different tragedy. If this kid was really prowling around his aunt's house (apparently trying to break in?), then he might have been shot by police instead, for example. Was this a prank or game gone wrong (has happened before), was he a bad kid who really intended to invade his aunt's home (that's what it looks like right now), or was the father a murderer who conspired with his sister and planted evidence (least likely but still possible)? Both father and son were apparently well-liked people (which probably means that the community will blame this on guns ), but nonetheless something is amiss, and we currently do not know what.

Was he simply on his way to his sister's house?

According to at least one article, the father meant to investigate a suspicious person outside his sister's house, although it may just be one writer's interpretation; more details are needed to determine whether such an action was or would be justified.

If so, that underscores the need for situational awareness even more.

I agree that situational awareness is extremely valuable, but what concrete steps do you have in mind for situations like this?

Putting aside the numerous unknowns of this incident and taking the claimed events at face value for the moment, one thing that I wonder, in the spirit of ST&T, is whether the father had an opportunity to issue a verbal challenge before firing. Obviously this depends on distance and the precise actions of the intruder (assuming for now that he did appear and behave as an intruder). It seems like such a simple thing, but it could help avoid tragedies, and in some cases people may panic and forget.

apparently, in the advanced level of minecraft, you build your fortress out of blocks and then at night monsters come out and attack you.

Hmmmmm.........

Whether this has anything to do with the incident in question or not (it might), parents need to teach their children that when acting out their games for real, they won't "respawn" when they get killed. That and to be aware of how others, particularly cops and armed citizens, may perceive people running/prowling around while brandishing weapons (whether the weapons are real or not).

 

[MachIVshooter]

Life is harder when you're stupid. Sometimes, it's also quite a bit shorter.

Love it.

I'm using that as my sig line, unless you object (you're credited, of course)

 

[Owen Sparks]

You can only make a decision based on the information that you have at the time. Unfortunately, this goes for sudden decisions with life and death consequences as well. This appears to have been the case here.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by X-Rap: The body was in the driveway so it may well be the case that the brother was headed for the sisters front door and met the kid as he was headed up the lane.

It may well be, and that's tragic.

The tactical lesson, I think, is that wherever one may be going at night, and for whatever purpose, there is the potential risk of a deadly encounter.

The trick is to know how to detect and avoid it, how to escape and evade it, and if all else fails, how survive it.

Posted by Manco: True, but waiting for the police when one's sister is potentially in mortal danger also entails risks (assuming for the sake of argument here that she was unarmed).

Not if one waits inside the sister's dwelling.

For all we know, however, it may simply have been replaced by a different tragedy.

Yes indeed. He or she who goes looking for a threat risks (1) shooting an innocent person; (2) shooting a prowler and being judged to have been unjustified; (3) being ambushed and injured or killed by the suspect or his accomplice; (4) being shot by an armed citizen investigating a suspicious noise or sighting; or (5) being shot by arriving first responders.

The father meant to investigate a suspicious person outside his sister's house;...

If so, he made a terrible error, and one which we advise against all the time.

One who suspects trouble in his own yard is invariably better off remaining indoors. One who needs to assist a neighbor would be better off doing so from within the neighbor's dwelling.

...more details are needed to determine whether this action was justified.

I don't know of anything that would make the investigation of a suspicious sighting unlawful, but it is almost always tactically unsound.