Man shot dead in his tracks by homeowner

[308Mike]

Linkarooni:

Man shot dead in his tracks by homeowner after he invaded his home
Posted by Liberty On February 23, 2014

Savary Drive shooting in Pasco – YouTube.

Ontiveros was questioned by police after the shooting but was not arrested. The case will be sent to the Franklin County prosecutor for review for possible charges.

Possible charges from a home invasion intruder???

VIA: Tri-City Herald

PASCO — Blood stained the front door and lawn of the west Pasco house where police say an intruder was shot to death by the homeowner early Friday morning.

Police found Stephan Sergio Aceves, 28, dead shortly after 2:30 a.m. in the yard near the front door of the house at 8011 Savary Drive. Aceves was reportedly trying to get into the house when he was shot by Rudy Ontiveros Jr., a nuclear plant security guard, who was home with his girlfriend and young children.

Police did not disclose the identity of the homeowner Friday. The Herald confirmed Ontiveros’ name through property records and social media.

Aceves was already dead by the time police arrived, saidPasco police Capt. Jim Raymond. Several shots had been fired from a handgun.

“Basically, (Aceves) was pounding on the door in the middle of the night,” Raymond said. “A woman went to call 911. The homeowner got up. (Aceves) made it inside. The confrontation took place inside the residence.”

Police said it doesn’t appear Aceves and Ontiveros knew each other and the apparent break-in may have been random.

Ontiveros was questioned by police after the shooting but was not arrested. The case will be sent to the Franklin County prosecutor for review for possible charges. The Franklin County coroner has scheduled an autopsy for Monday.

Ontiveros answered his door late Friday morning wearing rubber cleaning gloves and declined to talk about what happened.

Neighbors told the Herald that Ontiveros lives at the house, just off Road 68 near the water towers, with the woman and at least three small children, including a 6-month-old baby.

Barbara Brower-Jones, who lives next door, said she spoke with Ontiveros shortly after the incident. She and her husband did not hear any noises.

Ontiveros was awakened by someone trying to break down the door, Brower-Jones said. He told her he grabbed a gun, looked out the window and saw a man trying to hide near his front porch.

Ontiveros tried to warn the man that he had a gun, but “it didn’t seem to matter he had a gun,” Brower-Jones said. Somehow the door was opened, and Ontiveros told his neighbor Aceves lunged at him before he shot him.

Multiple neighbors reported hearing pounding and then four shots.

Brower-Jones said Ontiveros looked distressed as he told the story of what happened and was “emphatic” that he didn’t know the man.

“You could tell he had been through something traumatic just by his voice,” she said. “He was visibly shaken. It was obvious he felt extremely threatened.”

Neighbors described the family who lives there as hardworking, friendly and quiet. They moved into the neighborhood about a year ago.

Late Friday morning, three SUVs were parked in front of the green and brown house, which was decorated with Christmas lights, Valentine’s Day hearts on the window and a cross by the door. Assessor records show Ontiveros bought the house for almost $164,000 in April 2013.

Several neighbors who spoke with the Herald said if he felt threatened, he had the right to protect his family.

“The guy has kids. You can’t be messing around with someone’s family,” said Steve Crampton, who lives down the street. “I am sure there are a lot of people armed nowadays. You just never know.”

Brower-Jones agreed.

“The main thing is that he had the presence of mind to protect his family,” she said. “That takes a lot of courage and strength to protect your family like that. I don’t know how I would act in a situation like that.”

Other than some minor thefts recently in the neighborhood, people said Savary Drive is usually a quiet street where families know each other and people feel safe.

Neighbors were shocked when they saw the swarm of police cars that flooded their street early Friday. At least two neighbors said they now wanted to start a neighborhood watch program.

“It is just a really quiet neighborhood,” said Jeannine Hinckley, who lives across the street from Ontiveros. “I am just really surprised that something like this would happen.”

Mike Paoli, spokesman for Energy Northwest, confirmed Ontiveros is a security guard and has worked there five years.

All security guards at Energy Northwest are well trained, usually have a military or law enforcement background, and carry weapons while on duty, he said. They undergo stringent background checks every three years and have psychiatric evaluations.

The security guards at Energy Northwest are on par with any law enforcement agency in the nation, Paoli said.

“All of our nuclear security officers are trained to federal requirements to protect the plant from sabotage and just about anything you can think of,” he said.

Read more here: http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2014/02/1 ... rylink=cpy

[Greg]

Somehow the door was opened

I imagine that's why they're referring it for possible charges- who opened the door exactly? That and the possibility the dead guy was shot in the back.

[Jered]

Here's our justifiable homicide statute.

RCW 9A.16.050
Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.

Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.

I don't think that the prosecutor will file any charges. Here's the felony he was committing at the time:

RCW 9A.52.025
Residential burglary.

(1) A person is guilty of residential burglary if, with intent to commit a crime against a person or property therein, the person enters or remains unlawfully in a dwelling other than a vehicle.

(2) Residential burglary is a class B felony. In establishing sentencing guidelines and disposition standards, residential burglary is to be considered a more serious offense than second degree burglary.

[Greg]

Here's our justifiable homicide statute.

RCW 9A.16.050
Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.

Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.

I don't think that the prosecutor will file any charges. Here's the felony he was committing at the time:

RCW 9A.52.025
Residential burglary.

(1) A person is guilty of residential burglary if, with intent to commit a crime against a person or property therein, the person enters or remains unlawfully in a dwelling other than a vehicle.

(2) Residential burglary is a class B felony. In establishing sentencing guidelines and disposition standards, residential burglary is to be considered a more serious offense than second degree burglary.

Perhaps I was too subtle.

If it was the resident who opened the door (why would he do that, exactly?) it would tend to throw the 'facts' of the rest of his story into dispute. When there's an oddity that stands out at you like that - "somehow the door was opened" - love the passive voice there, then it seems to be worth a second look.

And even if everything reported is exactly true, there's still some fishiness to the whole thing. Some guy bangs on your door, you get up and tell him through the door you have a gun, look out through the window and 'see someone trying to hide near your porch' and then things get fuzzy and the guy winds up dead on your lawn?

[308Mike]

It's quite possible the homeowner may have thought he recognized the voice, but couldn't see the person at the door so he tried to crack the door open a bit to look. The suspect shoved the door open and charged inside, going past the guy at the door - so he was shot in the back after he went by, to protect the others inside the residence.

Bottom line - just because he was shot in the back (he could have also been bent over at the waist trying to tackle the homeowner, who then shoots him in the back), it does NOT mean the shooting might not be justified anyway.

Keep an open mind, but NOT so open your brain falls out!!

[Jered]

It's quite possible the homeowner may have thought he recognized the voice, but couldn't see the person at the door so he tried to crack the door open a bit to look. The suspect shoved the door open and charged inside, going past the guy at the door - so he was shot in the back after he went by, to protect the others inside the residence.

Bottom line - just because he was shot in the back (he could have also been bent over at the waist trying to tackle the homeowner, who then shoots him in the back), it does NOT mean the shooting might not be justified anyway.

Keep an open mind, but NOT so open your brain falls out!!

Just because he was shot in the back doesn't mean that it is unreasonable to conclude that he intended to commit residential burglary.

[Rod]

Massad Ayoob has written extensively about the back shooting often in his columns. It's very possible that the first shot hit the man from the front then the subsequent shots hit him in the back because he spun from the first hit. Most people tend to shoot two to 6 rounds in engagements like this. Wait for the police investigation and coroner's report before speculating.

[Greg]

It's quite possible the homeowner may have thought he recognized the voice, but couldn't see the person at the door so he tried to crack the door open a bit to look. The suspect shoved the door open and charged inside, going past the guy at the door - so he was shot in the back after he went by, to protect the others inside the residence.

Bottom line - just because he was shot in the back (he could have also been bent over at the waist trying to tackle the homeowner, who then shoots him in the back), it does NOT mean the shooting might not be justified anyway.

Keep an open mind, but NOT so open your brain falls out!!

Just because he was shot in the back doesn't mean that it is unreasonable to conclude that he intended to commit residential burglary.

ATTEMPTED burglary (the banging on the door) is about all that's been firmly established. The rest is unclear. Could be homeowner knew the guy and they had a fight after the visitor showed up angry. Could be the homeowner opened the door and went outside to straighten out some jerk on his porch. Could be the guy got inside, saw a gun in his face, turned to hoof it and got blasted in the back and dropped dead in the yard. Or any combination of the above. Or none.

Don't get me wrong, I happen to think this is more likely to be a good shoot than not, but there's more than a little fuzziness here that lends itself to taking a second look.

[Jered]

Chances are that someone coming by at 0200 or so is not a legitimate visitor.

According to this:

According to Brower-Jones, Aceves continued pounding on the front door and when the homeowner opened it aceves lunged towards him.

That's when the homeowner is said to have fired multiple rounds killing Aceves.

If this is true, the guy entered the house illegally. To the best of my knowledge, Washington makes no distinction about the means of access, only that one "unlawfully enters a dwelling."

I word it that way because:

RCW 9A.52.040
Inference of intent.

In any prosecution for burglary, any person who enters or remains unlawfully in a building may be inferred to have acted with intent to commit a crime against a person or property therein, unless such entering or remaining shall be explained by evidence satisfactory to the trier of fact to have been made without such criminal intent.

Meth is big down there. I wonder if he was on it.

[Greg]

My previous post remains safely uncontested, yes.