Skip to comments.Man claims self-defense in fatal San Jose shooting
Posted on 02/26/2014 10:08:36 AM PST by marktwain
A man who lives at this house told police that someone had shot at his house and was trying to break in. He says he got his own gun, fired back in the direction of the shots, and called 911.
When police arrived the intruder was gone, apparently having sped off in a car with at least one other person.
A short time later, a man was dropped off at a hospital with at least one gunshot wound and he died.
"After further investigation, they determined that the subject at hospital was related to incident that occurred here on Pine Ridge Way," Officer Albert Morales said.
Police say there is evidence someone fired on the house, but they only have the resident's version of events.
(Excerpt) Read more at abclocal.go.com ...
Someone who has fired into your house has deadly intent and the means to follow through with it. Shooting back seems pretty cut and dried self defense to me. Even if they were driving away that would not prevent the shooter from continuing to try and kill you, thus you are still in danger till the vehicle is gone.
That is a menacing statement. I wonder who's to blame for it, the police or the New reporter.
You do not fire in the “General Direction” of gunshots and only rarely will you hit something fired in the “general direction.” Something is missing from this story and I suspect it is the idiot media's reporting.
Unless somebody shoots at your door (trying to shoot out the lock?) and you return fire through the door, hitting him on the other side.
A few possible twists to this one. Shooting at the house is indeterminate, unless they knew the person inside, or they were trying to shoot the door locks.
Typically, the California technique of home burglary now uses four individuals and two cars, with two of the burglars knocking on doors to see if anyone answers. If nobody does, they break in. Only if something heavy and of high value do the other two get summoned. Otherwise, they just keep watch.
If the accomplices carried their wounded one, they may have left enough DNA on him to get samples, which if they are already in the system will implicate them, and if not, if they get picked up in the future it will.
Don’t know if you were commiserating or what, but my point was the Author felt compelled to inform us we only have the shooters side of the story .... like that’s uncommon and therefore suspicious.