Homeowner shoots burglar in NE Portland

[GreatWhiteHunter]

Homeowner shoots burglar in NE Portland

Posted by The Oregonian June 29, 2007 05:17AM

Categories: Portland, Top Stories

A 26-year-old burglar was shot by a Northeast Portland homeowner in an early morning incident, Portland police said.
The alleged burlgar was shot once and has what Sgt. Brian Schmautz described as a life-threatening injury. Homicide detectives have been called to the scene of the burglary in the area of Northeast 107th and Glisan.
About 4:40 a.m., 9-1-1 dispatchers got a call about a possible intruder in the home. Dispatchers were then told shots had been fired and someone was down. When police arrived, they stood outside the home and called for the homeowners to step out. Once inside, police found a critically wounded man in a back enclosure of the home. Police said the home had signs of "forced entry."
Police said a 61-year-old man who lives in the home with his wife fired the shot that wounded the alleged burglar. The man's wife made the call to dispatchers, police said.
Police wouldn't identify any one involved in the incident, but said the homeowners are cooperating with police.
A man at the scene identified himself as the son of the homeowners, Walter Hudson. He identified his parents as Leroy and Janice Hudson.
He said his parents have lived in the home for about 18 months. Walter Hudson received an early morning phone call from his sister about an incident at their parents' home.
Walter Hudson said he didn't know what type or how many guns his father kept in the home. He said he's concerned about this parents' welfare.
"I'm just glad everybody is all right," he said. "I'm very concerned."
Walter Hudson stood across the street as his father was talking to police in front of the home.
A stretch of Glisan is closed this morning because of the investigation.
No other information about the case was immediately available.

-Noelle Crombie
noellecrombie@news.oregonian.com

[roadsend]

There is an element of occupational risk in being a burglar, at least in places where homeowners are free to defend themselves.
That said, this kind of incident is unfortunate for everyone involved.
At least the homeowners were not hurt.

[7066]

Good for the home owner. Hope he does not feel bad for the crook. Hate to see people hurt but he brought it on himself.

[PGJPJ]

I had some guy trying to break into my house before. Turned out to be some drunk and confused college kid. I would have hated to shot him, and find out later he was just drunk and thought he was getting into his girlfriends house.

But on the other side of the coin, after I called 911 it took about 3 minutes before the cops got there. And a lot had happened in that three minutes, but I never felt unsafe with a loaded .40 handgun pointed at the door he was trying to enter.

I’m thankful to live in America where we can still defend ourselves.

[Fish Killer]

One less person in jail......

[tnj8222]

good for him, hes protecting his family and home. definately nothing wrong with that!

[Chug]

Feel sorry for the home owner... having to defend his Safety.

crime is getting worse... Just look at the paper Or websites on WHO in jail... scary stuff.

Hope he fairs good after this, Burg attack.... Good shot!!!. Buy more ammo, Rotate the old ammo for new!..

[Chrome Bumper]

Sounds like the home owner did every thing right.

[alaskan]

Glad to see the good guy's winning one. It seems like the only shooting stories in the news are about some whacko shooting up a school or street corner.
It's sad when anyone has to shoot someone else, there is usually a lot of lasting grief for the shooter.

[ampersat]

I'm hoping this serves as a warning to other would-be burglars: you just might meet with lethal force.

[mandinga]

Kudos to the homeowner.


Protecting ones family and possesions is something alot of people take for granted.

[Bobberman]

Originally Posted by ampersat

I'm hoping this serves as a warning to other would-be burglars: you just might meet with lethal force.

a armed society is a polite society

[Don Becker]

Originally Posted by Chrome Bumper

Sounds like the home owner did every thing right.

Yes . . . latest news is "right between the eyes." 'Anyone that cannot see the deterrent value? Don

[Ryan Pultz]

I wonder if the Family of the burglar can file a class action lawsuit against the homeowner. I think it is great he defended his family and stopped the burglar but I worry less about the law and more about the guy’s family taking me to court rp

[Myles]

While I feel the same way as everyone else here it could be bad news for the guy, he may have to prove that his life was threatened.

[Ryan Pultz]

Originally Posted by Myles

While I feel the same way as everyone else here it could be bad news for the guy, he may have to prove that his life was threatened.

the news said if they are in your home in oregon you do not have to prove your life was thretend cause at that point it is leagle to shoot rp

[Chug]

Originally Posted by Ryan Pultz

I wonder if the Family of the burglar can file a class action lawsuit against the homeowner. I think it is great he defended his family and stopped the burglar but I worry less about the law and more about the guy’s family taking me to court rp

He should be Exempt from that!!.. burg was busting door, into to do HARM to him & his wife, to the point of death. He applied the correct force!!.. My book, NO charges NO Court. counsol (sp). With a free box of new ammo.


Dang good shot!!!... SHOT PLACEMENT.. changed the outcome of the fight!. Home owner is safe. that is what counts..

Darwins law kicking in

[Don Becker]

Originally Posted by Ryan Pultz

I wonder if the Family of the burglar can file a class action lawsuit against the homeowner. . . . rp

'Little uncertain re your reference to "class action lawsuit," in this kind of case. But, I think the answer is "yes" the man can be sued - - - 'most anyone can sue for most anything - - - 'question is, will they get anything? 'Let me on that jury! The man's homeowner's insurance will pick-up his defense. Don

[RODACTION]

Originally Posted by Don Becker

Yes . . . latest news is "right between the eyes." 'Anyone that cannot see the deterrent value? Don

Where I come from they call that "Fancy Shootin" nice work mister home owner !!

[Rainman]

While I agree wholeheartedly with most of the above comments, I feel compelled to say that there are far, far more family members or friends shot than burglars.
My Gramps always told me to be very sure about what my target was, and if there was any doubt, to not shoot.
Having said that, I do keep a 9mm in my nightstand, just in case.

[Ryan Pultz]

I am sure if he managed to shoot the guy between the eyes then he was sure of his target rp

[PGJPJ]

Originally Posted by Rainman

I feel compelled to say that there are far, far more family members or friends shot than burglars.

and there are 100 times more kids killed by back yard swimming pools then killed by guns in the home.

link

Protect your right to protect yourself. Don't buy the propaganda.

[Herring Impaired]

Originally Posted by Ryan Pultz

I think it is great he defended his family and stopped the burglar but I worry less about the law and more about the guy’s family taking me to court rp

At least he is still alive to fight it out in court... Ending someone elses life to save your own can't, and should not be easy. But again, at least he survived the ordeal to deal with those issues....

[Ryan Pultz]

Originally Posted by Herring Impaired

At least he is still alive to fight it out in court... Ending someone elses life to save your own can't, and should not be easy. But again, at least he survived the ordeal to deal with those issues....

Very very true! rp

[ICHTHYDEMON]

Originally Posted by Herring Impaired

At least he is still alive to fight it out in court... Ending someone elses life to save your own can't, and should not be easy. But again, at least he survived the ordeal to deal with those issues....

Hows that saying go?

Judged by 12 or carried by 6.

[retiredgal]

It appears he did what he was forced to do to protect his home and family. The sad part, is he now has a great emotional burden to carry and cope with, even if he was justified and had no choice due to the intruders actions. It is sad what he and his family will now have to undergo due to the crooks stupidity and choices.

[bassettmama]

Good for the home owner. If someone were to break in to our house, I'd hope that we wouldn't have to shoot someone, but if it were between him or my family, you betcha he'd get some well deserved lead.

[fishncliff]

" the news said if they are in your home in oregon you do not have to prove your life was thretend cause at that point it is leagle to shoot".

In using deadly force, the laws require you to be in fear for your life or defending someone who is not capable of defending themselves. Just because they enter your house, doesn't mean you can shoot them.

In Seattle, 2 cases come to mind.

1... A homeowner shot a burglar as he rushed towards the homeowner in the dark.The homeowner fired several times at the burglar. He was charged with manslaughter because the burglar was running through the house to avoid being shot, again. Norm Mailer, DA, said the homeowner used excessive force because the bad guy was trying to flee and defending himself by running away. The burglar was shot in the chest and front of the knee. The homeowner was aquitted and was sued by the burglar's family. The civil case was dismissed by a judge because it had no merit.
The police did not return the homeowner's firearm because "the gun" was involved in an "investigation".

2... A pharmacy owner shot a tweeker after he struck her elderly mother in the head with a hammer, in a robbery attempt.. She was charged with manslaughter by the same DA, because the tweeker dropped the blood soaked hammer before being shot.
The owner was aquitted and sued the city of Seattle and the DA for false arrest. Don't know the outcome of the civil suit.

In both cases, deadly force was warranted by law, but the 2 people had to prove their innocence at a large cost in time, emotion and money.

" I wonder if the Family of the burglar can file a class action lawsuit against the homeowner."

The owner can be sued for " wrongful death ".

The homeowner is liable for civil damages and not all homeowner policies will cover this type of occurence.

[Ryan Pultz]

fishncliff Washington law might be different then Oregon I don’t know but I would not shoot a fleeing person but if I was the only one between a burglar and my wife or son that man will have some hot lead coming his direction rp

[SteelheadBum2]

Originally Posted by alaskan

It seems like the only shooting stories in the news are about some whacko shooting up a school or street corner.

Because the media wants to portray as many negative things about guns as they can, so they can effectively sway us to ban them.

Way to go for the home owners If you try to rob my house, expect some heat to get shot your way!

[SteelheadBum2]

Originally Posted by alaskan

" I wonder if the Family of the burglar can file a class action lawsuit against the homeowner."

What type of country do we live in? This completely disgusts and disturbs me. "

"Yeah my son tried to rob a elderly couple's house with force, and he got shot. We are the victims!"

You can't blame the bull for charging you when you tick it off!

[Empire]

It looks like it is a justified shooting, and there will be one less burglar on the streets (should he pass) and maybe his co-workers will rethink their career choice. I wonder what kind of criminal history the burglar had?

It is unfortunate that the homeowner is going to be scrutinized. It is likely he has never shot anyone and he is going to have some doubt about himself when he gets sued. Unfortunate emotions for sure.

[TheRogue]

Anyone see the article in the Oregonian today, on the Metro page? The sub heading:

A homeowner hears a noise, gets a gun, and shoots an unarmed man in the head.

Un-freaking believable!!!! What in God's name possessed the editor to allow that sub heading? Who's the guilty party here? Classic Oregonian; let's spin everything.

Disgusted with the Oregonian again.......

kyle hensley

[roadsend]

Originally Posted by TheRogue

Anyone see the article in the Oregonian today, on the Metro page? The sub heading:




Un-freaking believable!!!! What in God's name possessed the editor to allow that sub heading? Who's the guilty party here? Classic Oregonian; let's spin everything.

Disgusted with the Oregonian again.......

kyle hensley

And people ask me why I read so little in the "newspapers" and believe even less.

[fishncliff]

Originally Posted by Ryan Pultz

fishncliff Washington law might be different then Oregon I don’t know but I would not shoot a fleeing person but if I was the only one between a burglar and my wife or son that man will have some hot lead coming his direction rp

Actually the laws in OR and WA are similar. I used to carry on duty and the laws don't separate duty and home protection. The law allows for use of force and places restrictions on that level of force.

I can assure you, that if someone enters my home and is threatening my family, they will be carried out.

[freespool]

Originally Posted by TheRogue

Anyone see the article in the Oregonian today, on the Metro page? The sub heading:




Un-freaking believable!!!! What in God's name possessed the editor to allow that sub heading? Who's the guilty party here? Classic Oregonian; let's spin everything.

Disgusted with the Oregonian again.......

kyle hensley

I agree TR, that was a very misleading headline, shame on the Oregonian for printing such misleading information.
That reminds me of something my grandfather used to say, "I'd rather be tried by 12, than carried by 6".

[reelbigfish72]

A homeowner hears a noise, gets a gun, and shoots an unarmed man in the head.

Homeowner Leroy Hudson, 71, shot the man between the eyes, according to police.
"My Mom told him she heard some noise in the pantry and she had the gun and gave it to him

that was a very misleading headline

Sounds like it was pretty accurate actually. Drawing my own conclusion from reading the whole story it sounds like the homeowner did the right thing. He did, indeed, hear a noise, get a gun and shoot the burglar, who happened to be unarmed, in the head. The fact the guy was unarmed doesn't mean the homeowner didn't feel threatened. No where in the headline or article did it say the homeowner knowingly shot someone who wasn't a threat. No where did it say he shouldn't have shot. What's so awful about the headline?

[freespool]

Originally Posted by reelbigfish72

Sounds like it was pretty accurate actually. Drawing my own conclusion from reading the whole story it sounds like the homeowner did the right thing. He did, indeed, hear a noise, get a gun and shoot the burglar, who happened to be unarmed, in the head. What's so aweful about the headline?

I would say that was a fairly simplistic headline, for a potentially deadly out come for the home owner.
I mean, the home owners home was being forcibly invaded by a burglar, the fact that the burglar was unarmed is irrelevant.

[reelbigfish72]

a fairly simplistic headline

I think that's the point of a headline isn't it? They typically place the actual story somewhere under it so you can read all the facts not just the "simplistic" version contained in the headline.

the fact that the burglar was unarmed is irrelevant.

When I read the post here on Ifish I was wondering if the bad guy was armed or not. If I'd seen the article in the Oregonian I'd have known right away.

How to write a news headline:
http://www.ehow.com/how_2002141_writ...-headline.html

[freespool]

Originally Posted by reelbigfish72

I think that's the point of a headline isn't it? They typically place the actual story somewhere under it so you can read all the facts not just the "simplistic" version contained in the headline.


When I read the post here on Ifish I was wondering if the bad guy was armed or not. If I'd seen the article in the Oregonian I'd have known right away.

How to write a news headline:
http://www.ehow.com/how_2002141_writ...-headline.html

I like, "Senior citizen uses deadly force on home invader"

or "Elderly man forced to defend himself during a home invasion incident"

[toas243]

Originally Posted by Fish Killer

One less person in jail......

Yes he`s now in the hospital which cost way more ,sure wish he would have euthanised this thing

[roadsend]

Originally Posted by toas243

Yes he`s now in the hospital ......

Better him than the homeowner.

[STGRule]

sure wish he would have euthanised this thing

I realise the guy broke into a house that had people in it. I don't know what he intended if he had the upper hand. I don't know if he would have hurt them or not. I'm glad the homeowner had the upper hand.

But, to wish somebody dead over a property crime seems a bit much. Yes, he instigated the contact. Yes, he is paying a horrendous price. But death is not a payment unless death preceded him.

[roadsend]

Originally Posted by STGRule

....I don't know what he intended if he had the upper hand. I don't know if he would have hurt them or not. ...and neither did the homeowner..

But, to wish somebody dead over a property crime seems a bit much. Yes, he instigated the contact. Yes, he is paying a horrendous price. But death is not a payment unless death preceded him. I couldn't agree more. But folks have to realize that being a burglar is dangerous. When your actions put the lives of others at risk, your life also becomes at risk.

I had two incidents of this nature occur at my home about thirty years ago. Because I was armed, I had the luxury of being able to take the time (several seconds) to ascertain the level of threat these individuals presented. In both cases, I chose not to use lethal force. Untimely aggressive action on their part would have effected a very different outcome. One incident involved a "bewildered" individual, the other turned out to be a druggie. Both were terrified more than I was. Had I not been armed, both would likely have gotten a splitting maul between the ears from behind, no questions asked.
Yes, to die for a "property crime" is a bit much. But I will not allow my family to be put at risk and neither should anyone else.

[Swamp Puppy]

Originally Posted by STGRule

But, to wish somebody dead over a property crime seems a bit much. Yes, he instigated the contact. Yes, he is paying a horrendous price. But death is not a payment unless death preceded him.

so, if i understand you correctly...the homeowner should have waited until the criminal that forced his way into his house killed his wife before taking action? what if it's your own death that might be preceding? i'd rather not wait.

good for the homeowner!! criminals take note.

[IDWITHELD]

There is no way to ascertain the actual (perceived) threat level from the internet or the Oregonian. This guy did what he thought was necessary under the conditions. I would of acted in a similar manor.

This is simple math for me. If you choose to break into homes while the home owner is home you could get :hit with a golf club, baseball bat, hammer, chainsaw, sword or even shot with a gun. You (the criminal) chose to accept the personal risk the moment you pried the lock apart on the sliding glass door or window and under your own free will entered another persons residence (which) you knew was against the law.
The way I see it the criminal owes the home owner one new lock, a round of ammo and a cleaning bill reimbursement.
Enough talk about criminal rights. More talk about home owner rights.

[scubaseth]

I wish they would not put the address and name of the homeowner. I would then feel feerful of some friend or family member trying to get some revenge.

I wish the best for the homeowners.

Scuba

[Joe Schwab]

Originally Posted by STGRule

Yes, he is paying a horrendous price. But death is not a payment unless death preceded him.

STG, I really hope that statement does not stand alone. There are enough defense attorneys out there that think that way about police officers. Fear for one's own safety is enough cause. No one should have to wait until deadly force has been used against them. Is that really what you meant?

[Irish Pennant]

I don't feel any sorrow, sympathy or pity for a low life that would break in and try to steal from anyone. What the thief's do is to diminish the quality of life for all of us. When and if this lowlife gets out of the hospital he should be sent to hard labor until he pays back the homeowner for the trauma that he put him through, then continue with hard labor until he pays for all the hospital cost, then he should serve his time for his crime.
I'm not surprised by the Oregonian's headline, it's in step their political bias.

[Duke]

"...But, to wish somebody dead over a property crime seems a bit much. Yes, he instigated the contact. Yes, he is paying a horrendous price. But death is not a payment unless death preceded him..."

The difference between property crime and violent crime is measured in fractions of a second.

The implication that the intruder was there only to burglarize the home and posed no physical threat to the homeowners is preposterous. His intentions could not have been pre-known, leaving the homeowner to assume the worst and make snap decision to protect himself and his family from threat.

[bmccain]

In using deadly force, the laws require you to be in fear for your life or defending someone who is not capable of defending themselves. Just because they enter your house, doesn't mean you can shoot them.

Oregon Law States that deadly force can be used to stop a "residential burglary" or to protect yourself or a third person from death or serious physical injury.

Home owner needs to switch to a better weapon, something that won't cause the bad guy to stop at the hospital after being shot. Do not pass go, go straight to the Morgue!!

[Abalone]

A dead man makes a poor witness..... end of story.

[jokester]

Originally Posted by Myles

While I feel the same way as everyone else here it could be bad news for the guy, he may have to prove that his life was threatened.

If someone breaks into my house, in the middle of the night, without my knowledge and my permission to enter, he/she is threatening my life...END OF STORY!!

Good on the homeowner One less criminal roaming the streets!!

-jokester

[freespool]

Originally Posted by jokester

If someone breaks into my house, in the middle of the night, without my knowledge and my permission to enter, he/she is threatening my life...END OF STORY!!

Good on the homeowner One less criminal roaming the streets!!

-jokester

I wear contact lenses, so jumping up in the middle of the night and confronting a burglar is problematic.
I solved the problem with this.

http://world.guns.ru/shotgun/sh03-e.htm

Nothing sez "You Broke Into The Wrong House" like a 500A.

[mandinga]

I am in complete aggreeance that the homeowner was in the right, and I guarantee that a burgular in my house probably wouldnt live to see the following sunrise....but...


dont be so brash when talking about this stuff people. I can remember at least 2 stories where a homeowner shot and killed people that they shouldnt have.

-One that I remember very clearly was a drunken high school kid who was trying to get back into his home(sacramento). He was at the wrong house and when he got inside the homeowner shot him dead. Could you imagine living with this harsh reality for the rest of your life?

-Another was a undercover police officer that was investigating on a warrant. The homeowner didnt hear him knock and when the homeowner came out of his bedroom he shot and killed the cop. The police officer wasnt even investigating the homeowner, he was looking for a fugitive...who was not there. That homeowner is still in prison.

-When I was 18 a friend and I knocked on a door where we had heard there was a party. 2 seconds later the door FLEW open and I was staring down the barrel of a 12 gauge. Lucky for me and the homeowner, he didnt shoot...apparently the parents had come home early to a party their daughter was throwing...we just happened to be the first people back to the house after the dad had kicked everyone out...


I myself have been shot at and shot once when I was a kid! I was hiking through some private farmland when a farmer shot me. No joke...
I knew the land was private and the farmer had warned us on many occasions, but I chose to take a shortcut...Lucky for me it wasnt lead pellets, just salt rock...Nonetheless I still look at these situations individually because for 3 hours I thought I was going to die...I'll never forget that long walk home...

I think there's a line that can be crossed and then deadly force must be used. Breaking into a house will get you at the very least prison time...but it can also get you killed. I wonder how the courts will approach this one...an unarmed man breaks in and gets shot and killed. Seems cut and dried to me, but you and I both know that certain lawyer types will look at this under a different light if you will.

I wonder where some of you people will draw the line in a situation like this? If someone is on your land...will you shoot them? If someone breaks into your house will you identify yourself and give them a chance to surrender???

[mandinga]

Most of us are fisherman...right?


How many times have you had irate homeowners threaten to shoot you because you walked on their precious riverfront property? me once...no wait...twice!

Does someone have the right to shoot you because you walked across their lawn to get to a steelhead run?

I've never waited around long enough to find out...

[Abalone]

I believe if a home owner presented a weapon while you were walking onto his property in a threatening way it would be considered " Brandishing " . Not sure though ?

[RustySocket]

Originally Posted by Abalone

I believe if a home owner presented a weapon while you were walking onto his property in a threatening way it would be considered " Brandishing " . Not sure though ?

If believe that would be a good time to consider yourself lucky and move on down the road.

[Norski]

Bust my door down!!!! Front or Back!!!! you are going to meet your maker, bring it on.

[STGRule]

so, if i understand you correctly...

As a matter of fact you did indeed misunderstand. The poster referred to the perp as a "thing". He wished the "thing" dead. The "thing" is a human. The first tragedy is the guy that shot has to live with that the rest of his life.

I KNOW people have to protect themselves. I KNOW they have the right to do it. I KNOW it is legal. What I don't understand is the leaving the perp as a "thing".

ANYTHING you kill deserves respect. That's all. I don't understand the failure to revere life.