Browning, if you listen to the audio from the link I have posted above, you will hear the woman say she saw the man and described the man as white, short hair, wearing a t-shirt. She most definitely put eyes on him. The husband also said he saw him through the window. Both said they yelled at him. I would not call it a half assessed identification. They both saw the man and identified him as trying to get in. What more do you want.
DNS, I was going by what was printed, the audio won't pull up for me so I have no way of listening to it. I had already seen it (the audio link), I'm just on a crappy computer at work since I'm on shift, so audio and some video is out. Besides, I was saying that they more than likely set eyes on him, why don't you relax a bit? If that's what really happened then what I thought turned out to be true (they saw him).
As for your comment that the homeowner had reason to be concerned and your article talking about recent increased crime, it really did not matter if crime was increasing or not. Their reason to be concerned was because some maniac was trying to kick in their back door at 4:00 AM in the morning and was unresponsive to verbal warnings and commands.
You're trying to find fault with me because you misunderstood what I said about the possibility that they set eyes on the guy, you didn't know that I couldn't listen to the audio and that I was going by what the article said all by itself using the short transcript provided (which is what I highlighted).
I'm pretty sure that you knew that I was saying that they might have heard about the recent robberies in the area IN ADDITION to the pounding and screaming drunk guy at the door who was trying to kick it in to get in their house. It was just a minor addition that might have made them a little more cautious because of the recent rise in local crime of this sort, nothing else.