Minneapolis firefighter charged in man's death

[usmarine0352_2005]

http://www.twincities.com/allheadlines/ci_9247614

Minneapolis firefighter charged in man's death
Associated Press
Article Last Updated: 05/13/2008 07:17:38 PM CDT

SIREN, Wis. — A Minneapolis firefighter accused of killing his girlfriend's ex-boyfriend in northwestern Wisconsin was charged today with second-degree intentional homicide.

Kyle Lee Huggett, 32, of Danbury, was scheduled to make an initial appearance Wednesday afternoon in Burnett County Circuit Court. The charge carries up to 60 years in prison.

Prosecutors said Huggett shot 29-year-old John Peach, the ex-boyfriend of the woman Huggett was dating, after Peach broke through the front door of the woman's town of Swiss home on Jan. 20.

District Attorney Kenneth Kutz did not immediately return a message left on his work voice mail by The Associated Press late today seeking comment on the delay in filing the charge.

According to the criminal complaint, Huggett and Peach traded increasingly argumentative text messages the day of the shooting.

Deputies who obtained copies of the text messages said Huggett belittled the fact that Peach was receiving Social Security Disability, and said he was going to replace Peach as the dad of the 5-year-old boy Peach fathered with the woman.

Peach replied to one message with an unspecified threat and said he was thinking about coming over to the woman's house where Huggett was.

Huggett briefly considered contacting police but chose not to, the complaint said. Instead he replied with a text message saying he was a 230-pound veteran of the Army National Guard and he didn't take the threat seriously.

Just before 10

p.m., a barking dog alerted Huggett to a truck pulling into the driveway. He retrieved his gun from the basement just as he heard Peach knock on the door. A few moments later "the door flew open" and Peach entered the darkened home, apparently unarmed.

Huggett said something to Peach and Peach took a step toward him. The firefighter fired at least twice at Peach, who staggered outside and collapsed on the driveway, the complaint said.

Huggett checked on him and found no pulse.

The woman had called the sheriff's department when Peach began pounding on the door. Before deputies could respond, the woman called back to say she heard shots fired and believed her boyfriend was the shooter.

When authorities arrived, Huggett appeared calm and unemotional.

"I shot him," the complaint quotes him as telling a deputy. "He broke into my house and I thought he was going to kill me."

Huggett was arrested and released after posting 10 percent of a $50,000 signature bond.

Peach was on Social Security Disability after suffering unspecified injuries in a work-related accident several years ago, deputies said.

An autopsy confirmed that the cause of death was two gunshots to the chest, but noted that Peach was also suffering from heart-related issues.

Computerized state court records did not list any lawyer for Huggett.

No phone listing for Huggett could be found when The Associated Press tried to reach him for comment.

He shot an intruder in his house because he felt threatened. Why is he being charged?

I know he might of instigated it, but when another person decides to break into your house knowing your there, with intent to cause you harm, isn't it your right to self-defense?

 

[Jeff White]

Ever hear of mutual combat?

The news article doesn't give us all the text messages that were exchanged. It's possible, and I'd say even likely that Huggett invited Peach over or otherwise escalated the situation.

Stand your ground only means you don't have to back off from an unprovoked attack. It doesn't mean you have any right to escalate the situation to provoke the attack.

The devil is usually in the details in cases like this.

Jeff

 

[romma]

Wow! I hope Mr Hugget beats this.

 

[El Tejon]

I know I am unpopular telling THR this over and over, and I know people do not want to hear what they do not believe, BUT YOUR HOUSE IS NOT A FREE FIRE ZONE. It is not automatically "O.K." to take a fellow human's life just because this act transpired inside your home.

The insane danger created by the myth of "Castle Doctrine" (which I've seen referred to as some sort of protective fog around each gun owner) creates dangerous and false illusions inside people's minds that whatever they do is O.K. because they are in the right. As always, it depends.

 

[ilbob]

if nothing else, this case shows how stupid it is to continue arguments with people for no particular reason. Get over it and move on with your life.

 

[El Tejon]

He shot an intruder in his house because he felt threatened. Why is he being charged?

"Self defense" is not some magic incantation that's gets you out of being prosecuted. Just ask the cops here at THR how many times they hear "self defense" from the back of the squad car. "Officer, that 115 pound woman of mine, she's a devil when she's all mad and stuff, telling me to get off the couch and get a job and stop drinking, so I HAD to break her arms with the baseball bat. It was self defense."

He is being charged because the Prosecuting Attorney decided to charge him. If you take a fellow human being's life, you can expect the same.

I know he might of instigated it, but when another person decides to break into your house knowing your [sic] there, with intent to cause you harm, isn't it your right to self-defense?

Maybe, maybe not. Don't know everything here, so we just don't know. Again, your house is not a free fire zone. You cannot say text your enemy and invite him over to settle things "like men" (or invite him for a beer) and then smash him with a crowbar when he comes over.

Usually (depending on state law) one cannot claim self-defense if one is:

1. engaging in a crime or escaping from a crime.
2. provoking unlawful action by another with the intent to cause bodily injury.
3. engaging in mutual combat.

 

[JohnBlaze]

Exactly, firefighters work out on downtime and are otherwise expected to keep in shape, and he provoked a person on disability into wanting to fight him, and then sissied out and shot him?

Give me a break, just because Peach came into the girl's house, not Hugget's, gives Hugget no right to kill an unarmed guy. He had the chance to call the cops and resolve the situation in a more peaceful and adult manner, and he deserves any trouble he gets.

 

[TAB]

Sounds like they were acting like children and some one died becuase of it.

 

[El Tejon]

A fruit basket and an apology letter are always cheaper and have happier consequences than criminal litigation.

 

[grampster]

I don't think there is much more to say about this matter. El T, ilbob and Jeff White have pretty much covered all the bases with respect to this incident.

 

[45Badger]

Sounds like they were acting like children and some one died becuase of it.

So true. Sounds like a couple hormone crazed teenagers.

 

[JohnBlaze]

and yet they were older than I.

 

[csmkersh]

Prosecutors said Huggett shot 29-year-old John Peach, the ex-boyfriend of the woman Huggett was dating, after Peach broke through the front door of the woman's town of Swiss home on Jan. 20.

<snip>

Just before 10 p.m., a barking dog alerted Huggett to a truck pulling into the driveway. He retrieved his gun from the basement just as he heard Peach knock on the door. A few moments later "the door flew open" and Peach entered the darkened home...

You break into someone's home in Texas and this whole thing is a non-issue.
​

 

[ccw08]

well I hope it turns out ok

The only thing he really has going for him is that the guy is dead and cant tell the court what actually happened ( not saying that is a good thing so no offense please ) I am merely saying that the court will only hear one side of the story

on one hand the guy may have just invited him over and shot him for no reason and on another hand the guy may have said " heres my gun and your dead " then lunged at him

no way to tell because the person is no longer around but I just hope the judge gets the whole story and does what is right without making this whole situation an anti gun issue

 

[45ACPUSER]

The MPLS FD sure can not stay of out the lime light! So much internal BS and external BS. It is a wonder that they can actually function! :banghead::banghead:

 

[rantingredneck]

if nothing else, this case shows how stupid it is to continue arguments with people for no particular reason. Get over it and move on with your life.

Yep.

What I would have to say on this has already been said.

Other than lamenting the fact that a 5 year old boy is now left without a father and with his potential "stepfather" on his way to prison.

 

[primer]

You know what? If I talk/text on the phone with someone and they threaten me. I'm going to take it seriously. I would have filed a complaint. That being said, if the guy BEAT'S down my door, I'm gonna have a pretty strong feeling that he's not there to make friends. I would have warned the guy to turn and leave, but if he comes at me in my home it's double tap time. For there to be charges filed, there has to be more to this story. Alot of people assume that it was a well lit room and the guy could see everything that the intruder has or was doing. I don't know. I only know what I read and that may be inaccurate. The Ex walked into it, he threatened, he kicked the door in, he moved towards the shooter. Uh yeah, if you don't want to get shot, don't do that. If I don't want to get run over, I don't stand in front of cars! It may not be very high road, but this is the exact thinking that has turned this country to crap. To many peoples rights are being flushed. Did this man have the right to force his way into someone home? NO! But he's going to be charged with something? It's the same line of thinking when robbers can sue after being hurt trying to rob you! I pray that there is more to the story to make the charging of this man with a crime justified. If not, I'm really going to start to wonder about the mentality of the people of America. You know, America, the place where you are supposed to be able to feel safe in your home. Oh wait, or is it the criminals are supposed to feel safe? Nobody forced the guy to go to the home. His pride got him.

 

[spitfyre]

Just wondering: Would you guys reconsider if the firefighter were a woman? The guy sends a non-specific threat through text message, she replies, "Yeah, right. I'm with the National Guard and I don't take your threats seriously." Then later that night, he comes barging through her door and she shoots him. Will she get more sympathy than the male firefighter is getting now?

 

[TAB]

Deputies who obtained copies of the text messages said Huggett belittled the fact that Peach was receiving Social Security Disability, and said he was going to replace Peach as the dad of the 5-year-old boy Peach fathered with the woman

anyone that says that, knows exactly what they are doing.

That is an extremely childish statment.

 

[bdickens]

csmkersh said:

You break into someone's home in Texas and this whole thing is a non-issue.

Not so fast, hotshot. With that attitude, you're liable to end up being Bubba's new girlfriend up in Huntsville. No "castle doctrine" or "stand your ground" law in the country lets you insult and provoke people with impunity.

 

[primer]

While I agree with you on that statement tab, you should never tell a parent that you are going to replace them. I think there are some points missed. First the dad may have been deadbeat or abusive, I don't know if he was or not. I know I wouldn't make a statement like that to the father of one of my stepchildren (if I had any)out of respect. Unless, there was a reason. There are no facts that support a deadbeat dad issue. Now, if I walk up to you and tell you I'm going to beat you up, what can you do? If you text me and tell me your going to beat me up, what can I do? Can I go kick your door down looking for you? Nope. He should not have went to his house. He elevated the intensity of the situation. IF the guy wouldn't have been shot, guess what he could have been charged with breaking and entering. So, he took the most aggressive step, he drove over there, he kicked/beat the door down. He DID break the law. He got shot for it. If he wouldn't have gone over there he wouldn't be dead. If your scared of someone do you go looking for them? You know what the defence will probably say? That the prosecuter is trying to introduce prior events. What matters is what happened at that moment to cause a shooting. Running your mouth to people about their children is wrong, very wrong. But it was a prior event. Don't get me wrong, I'm not happy about the guy being killed. Not at all! I still hope to hear more about this case and find out more of the facts.

 

[TAB]

it does not say why he broke down the door...

Both partys are to blame here, of that I have little doubt.

 

[csmkersh]

That's another deal entirely, bdickens. Peach forced an entry into an occupied habitation. As I stated before, in Texas this would be a non-starter.

§ 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in
Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against
another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the
force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the
other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor's belief
that the force was immediately necessary as described by this
subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:

(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person
against whom the force was used:

(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was
attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied
habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;
​

Texas Penal Code §9.31 SELF-DEFENSE

Now what happens in less civilized states is another problem.

​

 

[TAB]

That's another deal entirely, bdickens. Peach forced an entry into an occupied habitation. As I stated before, in Texas this would be a non-starter.


Quote:
§ 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in
Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against
another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the
force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the
other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor's belief
that the force was immediately necessary as described by this
subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:

(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person
against whom the force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was
attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied
habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;

Texas Penal Code §9.31 SELF-DEFENSE

Now what happens in less civilized states is another problem.

So if he broke down the door fearing for his childs life and/or that of his ex... it would still be ok for him to be shot?

 

[blacksheep]

The MPLS (*Fire, Police, City Council, Mayors Office, etc..*) sure can not stay of out the lime light! So much internal BS and external BS. It is a no wonder that they can't function!

fixed it for ya