Ex-boyfriend kicks in door, new boyfriend kills him

[tubtar]

Big R is speaking gospel in post 14. Hennepin county would portray the ex as the victim and prosecute to the letter of their interpretation of the law.
I would hope a jury would see through this if it gets to that point........but it will cost Cegon a pocket full of attorney fees.
I am not that familiar with Wright county politics , but it is largely rural and this would not make political hay like it would in the city.
Nice shootin , dude !
J.S.

 

[Speer]

He said he won't keep a gun in his home anymore.

Hopefully he comes back to Earth and reevaluates this foolish decision.

Either way, once again, guns save lives.

"may very well have been justified in taking another one's life," Kelly said.

Jesus.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

A loaded gun fell from his hand.

"You killed me," the couple recall Richter saying.

Cegon squeezed the trigger again.

"I shot him again to make sure he didn't get up," Cegon said. "I'll never forget the smell."

I'm very worried for him, he shouldn't have said "A loaded gun fell from his hand."

He offered that statement to the Police, not good.... I shot him, he said "you killed me", he dropped the gun BUT, I shot him again anyway!!!

This reminds me of another case a long time ago. Anyone here remember Brenard Getts? He bought a gun to defend himself on the NY City trains because he kept getting mugged, a lot of the times by the same muggers. He shot them all the next time they tried to mug him. His only mistake, after shooting one of the muggers he said,"You don't look so bad, here's another," and shot him again when he was on the ground. That got him jail time because he shot him when he was no longer an immediate threat and did so in front of witnesses who heard what he said.

I only hope this guy doesn't go to jail because in the eyes of the law, the second shot probably isn't justified by his own admission.

 

[glocktoberfest]

Pretty sure my version of this would have been "the gun was still in his hand and he was moving."

"house rules"

 

[glocktoberfest]

Hank , please note my new sig line , still chuckling on that one ! thanks .....

 

[brerrabbit]

Even with the second shot, it was still a good shoot. Its the middle of the night, he has a known threat with a history of violence coming in to kill him and his girlfreind. The guy breaks into the house then forces his way into the bedroom and gets shot. The shooter is not a trained gunman, in the heat of protecting himself and his lady he unleashes a second shot when he might not have needed to.

I wasnt there and am not going to second guess him.

I can't even envision a prosecutor being so dim as to try prosecuting this.

 

[Fosbery]

If I'd been his friend I wouldn't have lent him my gun. I'd have taken him to the gun shop and helped him pick one out - lending him the money if needs be.

If I was him, I'd be sending a letter of thanks to the manufacturer of the gun telling them how their product saved my life, and probably that of my partner and her son - not getting rid of it.

Other than that, he did what needed to be done. I hope he and everyone involved are ok (except the bad guy, of course).

As for the second shot: it may not have been justified in the cold light of day, but it was night time, he was scared out of his wits, tired, confused, nervous etc and he was defending a child and a lady. I'm suprised he didn't unload the whole magazine (assuming it had a magazine).

 

[Tried'nTrue]

It is easy to condemn another man's actions when one sits behind the safety of a computer screen. I've no doubt that Cegon did what he felt he needed to do in order to secure the lives and safety of his girlfriend, her son, and himself. Judging by the responding police officer's and the DA's comments and actions, Cegon will probably be cleared of any legal problems, as he rightly should be.

To condescendingly judge Cegon's words and actions is pure arrogance and inexperience. In the end, the innocent parties all survived. Mission accomplished.

 

[Caimlas]

His response is fairly typical for people who don't want to take responsibility for their actions or thoughts - they just want to go about their lives like drones, "normally" like everyone else.

 

[October]

"may very well have been justified in taking another one's life," Kelly said.

Jesus.

One thing to keep in mind before being so critical of the county attorney - his job is to make a decision based upon the facts, not just the first account that a newspaper reporter comes up with. For the county attorney to say unequivocally, at this point, that the shoot was justified would be irresponsible on his part. He needs to allow himself some wriggle room for those rare cases when the initial accounts are not representative of what really happened.

 

[Pilgrim]

"I'll never forget the smell."

Sounds (smells) like the deceased soiled himself.

Pilgrim

 

[Biker]

Maybe the shooter of the deceased soiled himself.

Biker

 

[AK-74me]

Good shoot, too bad he wasn't a bit smarter about the comments he made to the media.

The BG looks a bit like Charles Manson no?

 

[Firethorn]

I don't know, even with the 'iffy' second shot, the prosecuter might not want to waste the funds trying to prosecute the shooter given the circumstances.

I mean, the man busted down two barriers, had been released(on bond) by the police/legal system, etc...

It wouldn't take much of a defense attorny to paint the deap perp as a terminator type, who would have never stopped going after them until he was dead. That, if he'd survived, would have only been delayed in his ambitions to kill his former girlfriend and her new lover.

And, as we all know, the statement the press gets might not accuratly indicate the circumstances. He might of been reaching for the gun, to try one last time before he bled out.

edit: And yeah, the more the defense attorney could potray the perp as Charles Manson, the less anybody would want to convict his killer.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Cegon squeezed the trigger again.

"I shot him again to make sure he didn't get up," Cegon said.

In other words, the guy was wounded, not moving in an aggressive manner, no longer posed a threat warranting lethal force, but the "good guy" shot him again just so that he would not get up.

 

[Firethorn]

Double Naught Spy,

Maybe it's my upbringing, but I might of done the same. You see, even wounded he's still a threat. The police have shown that they can't contain him. He's made threats indicative that he'll still attempt to kill me and my loved ones as long as he's alive.

He's just broken into my bedroom, after busting down the front door. I was so afraid that I barricaded(ineffectivly as it turns out, but still) my bedroom door.

I've shot him once. He may no longer be an immediate threat(though I don't know for sure), but he's still a very legitimate long term threat.

One more bullet, and he's done...

 

[steelhead]

It is easy to condemn another man's actions when one sits behind the safety of a computer screen.............

To condescendingly judge Cegon's words and actions is pure arrogance and inexperience. In the end, the innocent parties all survived. Mission accomplished.

Actually those comments speak volumes of your ignorance and you have no conception of what you speak of. I have a career spanning over 20 years that provides a grounding for my observations. Since it seems your knowledge is limited to theory.

Taken from your bio:

I have several hobbies, not least of which are: hiking with my dog, learning to make knives, and learning all I can about firearms!

I strongly suggest you read "The Farnam Method of Defensive Handgunning", by John Farnam. This book provides a remedial overview of "all" the items that are important in self defense.

The above situation is a very good example that should be discussed and learned from. Most civilians seem to only focus on groups and tactical reloads, with little additional thought given to proper force levels and post shooting actions that can keep them out of trouble.

No one is saying he shouldn't have defended himself. However, if it went down like Mr. Cegon said it did. Then he may not have been within his legal rights to shoot the perp a second time. You shoot to stop - not to kill (even if you are an untrained civilian). Mr. Cegon's comments show that he had forethought in shooting the man after he had fallen and lost his firearm. The attack was over but Mr. Cegon wanted to make sure the guy didn't get up again even though he didn't (at that immediate time) show a continued threat. Now had he said, "I shot the perp twice in order to stop him from attacking us". You would see that the thought process was focused on reacting to a threat and that he fired 2 rounds which stopped the attack. This would result in a ruling of justifiable homicide or more likely no charges would ever be filled. This is what the DA is taking into consideration at this time.

Mr. Cegon is very confused at the moment and he is trying to rationalize what has just happened. His initial comments may or may not actually reflect what happened. That is why it is extremely important to "train" yourself to not say anything until you see your lawyer. They are there to protect you and provide clear thinking in a time when it isn't so clear what has just happened.

As for comments about whether he will ever use a gun again or not. There is a reason why LEO's receive mandatory counseling after a shooting. It isn't so easy living with the fact that you took a human life. Even when that life was trying to take yours. The last thing he wants to be made of is a hero or a poster boy for the RKBA crowd.

 

[BobMcG]

It's very unfortunate that he had to take a life (a scum-bag's life but a life none the less) and even more unfortunate he made the remark he did after. He had a much better chance of being in the clear without it for sure.

1) Not being firearms oriented nor an owner.
2) Only having one in his possession through borrowing it.
3) Has it in his life only for a matter of days.
4) To have his first firearms experience end like this?

I can see why he's sworn off firearms and can't really blame him. His life feels upside down right now and he's in shock. However, I think that after time he may very well change his mind.

 

[10man]

seeyaa

Natural selection is right on all of our heals it just caught up with the recently departed....

 

[RockyMtnTactical]

One less dirtbag walking the streets! Good riddance!

 

[SoCalShooter]

I mean, really...had he not been in possession of a shotgun they would both be dead. Should that not just reinforce the idea that you should have some sort of gun in your home for protection?

I would have to agree with that. Should definetly reinforce the idea of home protection.

 

[Gbro]

My,My;
The post hit just about every imaginable angle. My thought was "Holy ****" he shot him again! But upon pondering it for a time, i think the DA is right. IF, he dosn't have some training in the use of deadly force(appears not, but ??). Even in a most justifiable shooting the DA may let a Grand Jury make the difference. We, that have training/Carry Permits, as a rule are held to a higher standard, even though its not written..
Any insinuation of lieing is by far the wrong thing to do. What was it Ayoob said about one little lie?

Gbro

 

[Cosmoline]

REMEMBER: Don't shoot your mouth off to the press! And get a lawyer to do your talking for you, to both the press and the DA. When your blood is up and your nerves are going crazy, you're not in a good position to be making statements to anyone.

 

[PX15]

The "I don't want to keep a gun in my home anymore" statement makes sense...

After all legal aspects are over and the gentleman is found not libel for any charges he can always "change his mind"..

JP

 

[4v50 Gary]

Personally, I think the second shot is valid if the shooter says he was concerned that the perpetrator was reaching for his gun. The biggest mistake made was talking to the cops instead of having an attorney at hand to help make a statement. Even with justifiable shooting, there's always civil liability by the survivors (of the perpetrator).