Ok, Fair enough, but lets actually cite the law rather than telling others to do so.
http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/co...fo&service=iowacode&ga=83&input=562A#562A.27A
DANGER TO OTHERS.
1. Notwithstanding section 562A.27 or 648.3, if a tenant has
created or maintained a threat constituting a clear and present
danger to the health or safety of other tenants, the landlord, the
landlord's employee or agent, or other persons on or within one
thousand feet of the landlord's property, the landlord, after the
service of a single three days' written notice of termination and
notice to quit stating the specific activity causing the clear and
present danger, and setting forth the language of subsection 3 which
includes certain exemption provisions available to the tenant, may
file suit against the tenant for recovery of possession of the
premises pursuant to chapter 648, except as otherwise provided in
subsection 3. The petition shall state the incident or incidents
giving rise to the notice of termination and notice to quit.
The
tenant shall be given the opportunity to contest the termination in
the court proceedings by notice thereof at least three days prior to
the hearing.
As the story states, The first notice he received was on the day his apartment was cleaned out. (unless other information that contradicts this arises) The only reason he was unable to see the notice on his door, was his financial incapacity to pay bail. Hell I wouldn't put my family through the expense either. Not to mention the disposition of first and last months rent and security deposit. , I see nothing mentioned about those.
2. A clear and present danger to the health or safety of other
tenants, the landlord, the landlord's employees or agents, or other
persons on or within one thousand feet of the landlord's property
includes, but is not limited to, any of the following activities of
the tenant or of any person on the premises with the consent of the
tenant:
a. Physical assault or the threat of physical assault.
b. Illegal use of a firearm or other weapon, the threat to
use a firearm or other weapon illegally, or possession of an illegal
firearm.
A firearm collector found to have acted in self defense, albeit well after the fact. It still remains that he used his weapon Legally at the time, and committed no assault (or was cleared of all charges, it's too bad there's no video)
Just to be clear, the ONLY charge the prosecutors attempted to press in court was
reckless use of a firearm causing injury. Not assault, Not an illegal weapons charge.
http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/co...=billinfo&service=iowacode&ga=83&input=724.30
3. This section shall not apply to a tenant if the activities
causing the clear and present danger, as defined in subsection 2, are
conducted by a person on the premises other than the tenant and the
tenant takes at least one of the following measures against the
person conducting the activities:
You're Right, you have my apologies, it IS a specific law... Right there!
a. The tenant seeks a protective order, restraining order,
order to vacate the homestead, or other similar relief pursuant to
chapter 236, 598, 664A, or 915, or any other applicable provision
which would apply to the person conducting the activities causing the
clear and present danger.
b. The tenant reports the activities causing the clear and
present danger to a law enforcement agency or the county attorney in
an effort to initiate a criminal action against the person conducting
the activities.
Ok, I'd certainly consider Shooting someone to be an extreme form of pressing charges... but the parties causing the clear and present danger have been processed by the police.
c. The tenant writes a letter to the person conducting the
activities causing the clear and present danger, telling the person
not to return to the premises and that a return to the premises may
result in a trespass or other action against the person, and the
tenant sends a copy of the letter to a law enforcement agency whose
jurisdiction includes the premises. If the tenant has previously
written a letter to the person as provided in this paragraph, without
taking an action specified in paragraph "a" or "b" or filing
a trespass or other action, and the person to whom the letter was
sent conducts further activities causing a clear and present danger,
the tenant must take one of the actions specified in paragraph
"a" or "b" to be exempt from proceedings pursuant to
subsection 1.
This part below is Mildly troubling, but again, he was not made aware of the proceedings beforehand, though his landlord was obviously aware of the incident.
However, in order to fall within the exemptions provided within
this subsection, the tenant must provide written proof to the
landlord, prior to the commencement of a suit against the tenant,
that the tenant has taken one of the measures specified in paragraphs
"a" through "c".
Well, He's certainly fulfilled his duties in being cleared of the charges and Likely pressing charges as subsection B requires.
So He needs to write a letter apparently now?
Anything else you'd like? I don't disagree with you that they had the legal right, But they certainly handled it EXTREMELY poorly, and without factual information.
Being accused of a crime is not conviction. The guy just couldn't afford lawyers or Bail.
Note- Feel free to call me a skimmer again... You're the fellow who composed Post #28 after not reading the article, and tells other people to do his work.