It's a big day for guns in the news: new Georgia laws go into effect allowing residents to carry concealed weapons into parks, restaurants, and onto public transportation, and in Florida, employees and customers will now be able to conceal firearms on private property if locked in a car. Then there's this story: Joe Horn, a 62-year-old Texan has been cleared by a grand jury yesterday after he fatally shot two men he suspected of burglarizing his next-door neighbor's home.
Horn's case has sparked controversy between those who think he acted illegally and recklessly, and those who praise his swift action. Horn's attorney says, "he wasn't acting like a vigilante. He didn't want to do it," and that he's not a "wild cowboy" who shot unprovoked after he saw the two suspected burglars carrying bags out of windows of his vacationing neighbor's home. His lawyer says Horn was a scared man who was trying to defend his neighbor's home when the burglars came onto his property and threatened him, "He was scared. He was in fear of his life."
The details of the night are recorded in a 911 call, where a dispatcher urges Horn, "Don't go outside the house. You're going to get yourself shot if you go outside that house with a gun. I don't care what you think." Horn responded, "You want to make a bet? I'm going to kill them." Both suspects were shot in the back with a 12-gauge shotgun. After the incident, he called back saying, "I had no choice. They came in the front yard with me, man. I had no choice. Get somebody over here quick."
The case illuminates part of the complicated relationship between guns and crime — in this instance, was the jury correct in letting him go? Was Horn acting in self-defense?
Mantaray
Matthew Williamson
Sebastian
He called 911, was told to stay inside, said no, i'm going to kill them and then did - then claimed his life was threatened.
1He's getting away with murder.
Exactly, stephley.
I can support shooting in self-defense, but he had no reason to fear for his life, therefore no reason to defend himself. Until he decided to take the law into his own hands and go outside to confront them, were they threatening him at all? Were they trying to enter his home? Nothing in the coverage of this case indicates so. There was no reason on earth for him to act as he did.
2He stopped a couple of thieves, and I am happy to see that he has been cleared. The crime rate in his neighborhood will go down because of this. Who in their right mind is going to try and rob a house in that neighborhood now?
3Sounds more like defense of property than defense of self to me. IMO fatal self-defense should only be used when your or another's life is threatened. Like force for like force. By shooting them in the back it sounds like they werent threatening his life.
4I don't think the law covers you for protecting SOMEONE ELSE'S property. He went after them, they were not endangering him in his home.
5"Who in their right mind is going to try and rob a house in that neighborhood now?"
Fewer than before, I'm sure, but this sends a message that it's okay for people to take the law into their own hands. The whole reason we have police and a criminal justice system is to standardize the punishment of crimes, which vigilante justice won't do, to the detriment of safe, civil society.
Prior to going outside to confront the burglars, this guy said, "I'm going to kill them." What the hell was he thinking? He had already called 911. Cops were already on the way. That was all that he needed to do.
It was not for him to confront those guys or to punish them by killing them.
6in texas, the law covers you for protecting your neighbor's property if they asked you to watch over it while they are gone. it is not clear if his neighbor asked him to keep watch over his property. it's a very limited law which I don't really understand. personally, I wouldn't do it.
apparently he went outside and the theives threatened him outside, although how they threatened him is also unclear. But he went outside on his own volition, which was just stupid. and apparently if he shot them in the back, they were running AWAY.
7I am glad he was cleared, good job dude.
8I agree with the comment above. So if these two were arrested and convicted they would not have recieved the death penalty and that is basically what they got. I could understand if these two men were harming a person or physically threatening him but they weren't.
9ugh not the comment directly above me. How sad.
10I mean some of the commentators talk about how some people have a total disregard for life, do you think these guys deserved to die for their crime?
11Cops were already on the way. That was all that he needed to do.
12According to the 911 call no units were available, but to stay inside and wait. He had called a second time to tell the operator they were getting away, but he was going to stop them. That's when he went out and took care of business. (I heard the 911 tapes via the Glenn Beck program).
he should have shot them in the legs to disable them. there was no reason to kill them. he's been cleared, but he will have to live out the rest of his life knowing that he is responsible for the deaths of two people. hopefully their families will sue him in a civil court. some are making him out to be a hero but i think he's a monster.
13So if you were those neighbors, okay on vacation and someone broke into your house and was stealing precious irreplacable items, and you knew your neighbor was watching it, and that 911 told him to just chill on it, you would be okay with that? I wouldnt.
Texas law allows people to use deadly force to protect themselves if it is reasonable to believe they are in mortal danger. In limited circumstances, people also can use deadly force to protect their neighbor's property; for example, if a homeowner asks a neighbor to watch over his property while he's out of town.
His own neighbors, the house he was watching have called him a hero.
the burglers? no matter who they were or where they were from or if they were here illegally, shouldnt have been robbing houses.
14I can see getting mad if he sees them getting away, but I still don't think that justifies going out and shooting them in the back. That kind of disproportionate retribution is exactly why vigilante "justice" is not encouraged in our society.
15This man should be in jail. Horn went outside with the intention of murdering two people. He decided he was judge, jury, and executioner. The members of the grand jury are now accomplices to murder, in my opinion.
16caterpillar girl: in this country robbery is not a crime punishable by death. and even if they were going to steal irreplaceable items... they did not deserve to die. sorry, but there's really no way to justify what this guy did. he's a murderer.
17My local radio station has played the 911 tapes a couple of times, too.
A few people here are making assumptions. I heard on the radio yesterday that a police officer testified that when Horn took aim at these guys, they were headed in his direction and on his property. He had not way to know they did not intend to do a sweep of the neighborhood.
This is a 62-year-old retired grandfather. Apparently he has been seriously harassed since this incident. Is the justice system protecting him as much as they attempted to protect the two illegal Columbian criminals (who were allegedly part of a burglary ring)?
18"So if you were those neighbors, okay on vacation and someone broke into your house and was stealing precious irreplacable items, and you knew your neighbor was watching it, and that 911 told him to just chill on it, you would be okay with that?"
It would be extremely distressing and upsetting, but I personally wouldn't condone my neighbor going out and killing the burglars because of it.
19What were they stealing the HOLY GRAIL? I have a huge problem with you comparing human life to a personal item.
20if i was one of the neighbors id be horrified.
21um and if they were coming at him, how did he manage to shoot them in the back?
22Laine--when you say that a police officer testified that "when Horn took aim at these guys," do you mean that at the time they approached him he had already gone outside, armed, to confront them, therefore had drawn their attention? I'm just curious as to the timeline here.
"This is a 62-year-old retired grandfather. Apparently he has been seriously harassed since this incident."
Well, it's clear that he knows how to defend himself, anyway
And gitsie and yesteryear, I agree with you guys 100%^
23I do believe Mr. Horn was well within his right, however I also believe that Mr. Horn over reacted.
I would have defended my property indeed but I would not have chased the buglers if they were trying to leave. I would have just allowed the police to handle the matter.
24It seems like he put himself in harm's way, and then perhaps did have to defend himself. Based solely on the tape it seems like him shooting was premeditated.
But, I wasn't in the courtroom, so perhaps there are details that I'm missing out on.
25I'm going to have to agree with Jude C on this matter. Unless his life was in grave danger, which it doesn't sound like it was, I don't feel he had cause to take these individuals lives. I am more surprised that a jury actually found him not guilty. We can't pick and choose which laws to uphold, and based on the evidence released in this article, this man clearly did not have much regard for the law. Property does not equate human life...no matter if it is the life a pathetic burglar.
26If it was my home Caterpillar, I'd be horrified that my neighbor felt my stuff was more important than two human lives.
Laine, that's the second time today you've brought up nationality - does it matter where the two dead guys are from?
27I disagree with the jury based on the information presented, but am curious to know more details.
28stephley - yeah, i noticed that too. i'll bet that was an element of this guy's defense attorney's strategy. he was protecting his neighborhood from these evil brown people who came to take their stuff!!
29What is a Grand Jury? I was thinking that was a group of jutdges who decide if there is reason to pursue criminal charges, but it soundls like I'm missing something.
30Ha! I don't think the justice system protected those illegal Colombian thieves very well, considering they're dead.
31"i'll bet that was an element of this guy's defense attorney's strategy. he was protecting his neighborhood from these evil brown people who came to take their stuff!!"
Sad to say, I think it's likely that the verdict, or at least public opinion, would have come out rather differently if he had shot, say, two teenaged Caucasian punks.
32The justice system wasn't designed to protect those illegal Columbian thieves. It was designed to protect Americans.
33yall are leaping way out there in regards to lain.
34But he didn't shoot two teenaged punks. He shot to previuosily convicted criminals who were in their 30's. Two men who should've known better, but thought this was the easiest way to make money.
35Undave- A grand jury is a jury of citizens convened to decide whether or not charges or an indictment will be made. Some states to not have grand jurys (i.e. Wisconsin). States w/o grand jury's usually operate this way: a prosecutor files charges, a preliminary hearing is held where a judge determines whether or not there is "cause," then it proceeds to trial.
36UnDave, I didn't even see that part. I guess this never even went before a regular jury, then. A grand jury is a group of citizens that decides whether there is enough evidence to warrant charges. Maybe they dismissed it due to insufficient evidence. (Probably not, but it's a possibility.)
37I think that at the end of the day, this guy killed 2 people who were robbing a home. It would be hard to find a court that would have put these guys away for life, let alone execute them, so I do have a problem with this guy taking justice in his own hands.
On the other side, when you knowingly break the law by doing something like robbery, you are taking on a personal risk - that the homeowner, neighbor, dog, police or whomever is going to figure out what you are doing and it is hard for me to feel bad for people who get hurt/die after knowingly put themselves in a high risk situation.
It is kind of like the idea of signing a waiver when you go sky diving or something else equally adventurous/dangerous, if everything goes as planned, it is going to be an amazing, thrilling experience, but if it doesn't, you are screwed.
38A grand jury is a panel of ordinary citizens, drawn from the same pools as regular juries. Prosecutors have to convince the grand jury that there is reasonable suspicion, probable cause, or a prima facie case that a crime has been committed. A grand jury can compel witnesses to testify before them. The proceedings are secret though, the defendant counsel generally don't hear other witnesses' testimony.
And if you switched nationalities in the case so the neighborhood defender was brown, I bet he'd be on trial.
39Oops, sorry, lovelie, I didn't see that you'd already posted.
40Thanks ladies.
41I think fatally shooting them was a bit much. Also, can it be proven that his life was really in danger? He shot them from behind (in their backs). Woudln't that mean they were proably running away from him? The only way I'd ever want my neighbor to interfere with a robbery is if someone was stealing my dog, and even then, 1) she'd put up such a huge fight that they'd figure, "This crazy dog isn't worth it", and 2) I wouldn't want my neighbor to kill anyone. Just my two cents...
Oh, also? Who cares about nationality? I'm brown, and I'm not a thief. Oh, wait, I'm not Colombian...riiiight...
42I'm just saying, it could be *any* nationality, does it matter who was doing the robbing?
43I have absolutely zero sympathy for the "victims." You know what, if you don't try to rob people, you won't get shot by angry homeowners or their neighbors. Was death a fitting punishment for their crime? Not even close, but that's the way it played out.
44There are objects in my house that have little to no value, but are priceless to me. I would be devastated to lose those. I would hope that one of my neighbors would be willing to go to the trouble of protecting my house. I am betting that I'm pretty safe though, because 3 of my 4 neighbors are in the military. The 4th is a cop.
45Lilkimbo- I never read the part about a grand jury either...must have skimmed past that part. That makes me wonder though, because a grand jury refused to indict on these charges, whether a prosecutor will file under different charges...such as manslaughter? Especially with the likely backlash this might create.
46Thank you for that perspective MM. I agree.
47Executioners are back in style I see.
48What will be next, public hangings and angry mobs?
Lovelie, that's an interesting point. I wonder exactly what charges the jury considered.
49Lovelie - Can the DA file lesser charges? I thought that once charges were filed, you couldn't go back, unless the other charges were more severe.
50Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.