home intrusion scenario question

[negolien]

You say the front door opens. Was force used? Invoke you right to an attorney before saying anything to the authorities. Just my 2 cents worth. Good luck.

If your entry has been breached by anyone you could more easily justify UOF.

[Bobby Ricigliano]

I will again refer to 198.5 of the California penal code. The verbage is a little vague, but according to my interpretation you would be covered.

[monk]

You know, I could've sworn I read a PC which stated that homicide was justifiable in defense one real property. Maybe they mean when someone is setting your house or property on fire?

[dk94044]

in the Lasso incident, the dogs were outside of the house.

[PineStreet]

You know, I could've sworn I read a PC which stated that homicide was justifiable in defense one real property. Maybe they mean when someone is setting your house or property on fire?

I have never read any code that stated or even suggested homicide was justifiable in defense of real property.

Like said earlier dogs are considered property and you can not shoot to protect property. EVER.

As a pet lover I can say this.... Officer, if it wasn't for my dog defending my family, I am sure the intruder I shot would have made it upstairs and killed me. I was afraid for my life and the life of my family so I shot him... P.S. It was dark so I emptied 13 rounds and I was lucky I didn't hit my dog.

[biochembruin]

Why are all these people responding if they aren't sure of the answer? As the OP wrote the situation, it is a very bad shoot. If you get a lawyer and try to twist your shooting of a man to protect a dog into self defense, it might work. There is still that minor difference between what is legal and what is moral. Here's the upshot: it's not right to kill a man over a dog.

CPC 198.5 doesn't allow you to kill someone over property. It says that the law presumes that if someone breaks into your house (that is, where you sleep, not your yard or your detached garage) and you use deadly force against them, then the presumption is that you were in fear for your life. If you turn around and say, "No, I wasn't in fear for my life, but he was in my house and the law says I can shoot him," you're in trouble.

Please, to those who don't know the law, don't reply to these questions!

[oddjob]

Retired LEO (31yrs) here. As described this is a bad shoot. The downward angle (homeowner stops halfway down the stairs) will be apparent when the muscle tissues of the deceased are lined up to show the downward angle. The poster does not mention missed shots, but if there are any they will also show the angle of the shot. Holes in the muscle tissue will also show the position of the suspect relative to the homeowner and dog. The distance of "halfway down the stairs" will also be noted. Powder residue or lack of it (not powder burns) will also help indicate distance. Lighting conditions from the flashlight by the shooter, ambient light from the outside will be noted.

"Intruder is standing in doorway or on front porch while beating dog to death," Based on this scenario the suspect hasn't made entry into the residence. The shoe prints will show exactly where the suspect was standing as well as the blood splatter (from the dog). Splatter on TOP of the suspect's shoe will also show his/her location. Blood from the suspect will also show this.

"Extreme emotion".....Not good at all.....In fact this will be used against the homeowner.

Just my opinion, but this fictitious homeowner may do some custodial time. He will certainly pay out in civil court.

[Saym14]

Retired LEO (31yrs) here. As described this is a bad shoot. The downward angle (homeowner stops halfway down the stairs) will be apparent when the muscle tissues of the deceased are lined up to show the downward angle. The poster does not mention missed shots, but if there are any they will also show the angle of the shot. Holes in the muscle tissue will also show the position of the suspect relative to the homeowner and dog. The distance of "halfway down the stairs" will also be noted. Powder residue or lack of it (not powder burns) will also help indicate distance. Lighting conditions from the flashlight by the shooter, ambient light from the outside will be noted.

"Intruder is standing in doorway or on front porch while beating dog to death," Based on this scenario the suspect hasn't made entry into the residence. The shoe prints will show exactly where the suspect was standing as well as the blood splatter (from the dog). Splatter on TOP of the suspect's shoe will also show his/her location. Blood from the suspect will also show this.

"Extreme emotion".....Not good at all.....In fact this will be used against the homeowner.

Just my opinion, but this fictitious homeowner may do some custodial time. He will certainly pay out in civil court.

there are lots of fact missing here. was the door locked? was there forced entry ? why was the door open? who opened it? were the dogs originally in the house? or were they on the porch? as you suggested had the suspect entered the house? or not? who was the guy and was there some explanation as to why he was there? was he the UPS man or a gang banger on parole with an illegal weapon?

not enough evidence here to judge either way IMO. and per our constitutional law, ....innocent until proven guilty.

[biochembruin]

I think the OP is looking for some guidance for the situation as described. One could add all kinds of facts to make the shooting obviously good or obviously bad. But merely saying that he's innocent until proven guilty doesn't address his question. As described, with no other facts, the shooting is clearly bad. The home owner uses deadly force with the motivation of protecting his dog (property). The fact that his property walks around and wags it's tail has no meaning in the eyes of the law. With the facts described, the owner has committed manslaughter, at a minimum.

[tyrist]

You cannot kill a human being to protect a dog or any other property.

Now if somebody forces entry into your home with a weapon and is NOT IN FULL POLICE UNIFORM there is far more room but use your brain.

Honestly I am getting sick of these shooting scenario questions. If you cannot explain your actions and be 100% confident you are within the law then you need to just flee the scene because your going to end up ruining your life. There are so many variables that can change a given scenario that the untrained wouldn't even realize it.

[retired]

Please, to those who don't know the law, don't reply to these questions!

This sounds real good to me.

[Saym14]

With the facts described, the owner has committed manslaughter, at a minimum.

agreed its not legal to kill to protect a dog. what he was in fear for his life, after beating the dogs to death the suspect comes in after him ?

[biochembruin]

agreed its not legal to kill to protect a dog. what he was in fear for his life, after beating the dogs to death the suspect comes in after him ?

Now you are changing the scenario, and each scenario is different. As one use of force window opens, another one will close, so what was legal literally one second ago could be illegal the next second.

With the new conditions you describe, it might be a clean shoot. The law provides for one to use deadly force to protect yourself from serious bodily injury or death. Your new conditions don't provide enough info to say for certain either way, since things like distance and ability come into play, especially with blunt object weapons.

The main reason the original conditions posted would be a bad shoot is because the post makes it clear he is shooting a person to defend the dog (property), not to defend his life or the life of another person. Your new conditions don't automatically change it to a good shoot, but don't rule out that it could be a bad shoot either. There's not enough information there.

[oddjob]

"Intruder is standing in doorway or on front porch while beating dog to death, home owner fires two shots back to back shots killing intruder".

From the original post. The suspect hasn't addressed/threatened the homeowner yet. But the homeowner has killed the "intruder". The homeowner is still "halfway" down/up the stairs. The suspect is in the doorway or front porch area.

Again I base my thoughts on the original post.....and the original post only.

[Diesel70]

I would be in the same boat as the hypothetical home owner. My dogs are family, and I would have shot the attacker just the same.