Friday feel good story
Today’s feel good story comes from the Chronicle-Telegram in northern Ohio and it’s about a burglar by the name of Jeffrey Carson who had apparently robbed the home of Jack Dillon the other night and left a window unlatched so he could make a return visit and finish cleaning out the family. Unfortunately for him, Dillon noticed the unlocked window and was waiting for Carson’s return, sleeping on his couch with a handgun nearby;
The Dillons told police that they were awakened by the sound of Carson in their living room, and when Jack Dillon called out to him, Carson lunged at him. Jack then shot at Carson.
Evans said Carson died because of his gunshot wounds. Carson was lying on the Dillons’ couch, according to a 911 tape, and had stopped breathing but later began coughing before rescue crews arrived.
Eichenlaub has not released any new details of the case.
Carson had a criminal record, including theft and drug convictions, and had pending cases through Lorain County Common Pleas Court.
Carson’s sister, Bobbi Knicely, told The Chronicle-Telegram in an earlier interview that she did not believe that Carson broke into the Dillon’s home and that the couple knew Carson, as he was staying down the street from them.
Dillon plugged Carson five times, apparently finding a way to avoid some of the problems we’ve read about in the past when the burglars survived their encounter with lead injections.
Category: Feel Good Stories, Guns
Yeah, of course the sister is going to say that he did not break into their home. Well, answer me this. WTF was he in the house to begin with? Good riddance to bad trash!
That is a feel-good story! I feel better already!
Thankfully for this guy, Ohio seems to have passed a “castle doctrine” law in 2008.
http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=127_SB_184
Truly heart warming … the criminal died twice!
God Bless America and those who legally posses firearms!
A very large and annoyed cat is sufficient.
@5: LOL!! Only if it mistaken for a hand cannon of some sort.
I do have a problem with this story, though. It could conceivably be considered a set-up, where the homeowner found an unlocked window and instead of securing it, knowingly put himself in a position to aid in the criminal activity and subsequent death of the criminal. Then, the homeowner arms himself, knowing that the un-locked window will be the point of entry, and the criminal is later shot and killed, which could have been prevented by simply locking the window.
Now, if the homeowner locked the window and the criminal broke it to re-enter the house, then, I could see it, but this was a set-up, in my opinion.
@ Old Trooper, police might try to use that argument, but then they have to prove [beyond reasonable doubt] he wanted to kill the guy. Maybe he just wanted to catch him and hold him at gunpoint for the police but the stupid burglar “lunged” at him. So, fearing for his life, Jack Dillon had to pull the trigger a little bit.
@6 Depending on what kind of dipstick works in the local DA’s office that’s a scenario that is possible, hopefully unlikely though.
Regarding the sister, I have lots of friends and I never visit their homes through a window in the middle of the night….sorry sis, your brother was a known scumbag and ended up as he should have…
i’d empty the mag and if it moved, id reload and end the threat. But good for this guy- saved the state tax money from having to treat and house his sorry A@@…
@6:
With that argument, any time a homeowner finds their house broken into and doesn’t move out or take any further actions to protect themselves, it would be lying in wait.
If you come home and find your house busted into and a window left unlocked, wouldn’t you think that spending the next couple nights on the couch with a gun would be a good idea, just in case?
And there is alot more to this story then that short article. The guys family showed up at their house the next day to confront the Dillions.
http://morningjournal.com/articles/2012/10/20/news/doc50821d12b1ba5313324993.txt
The sister:
Kniceley admitted Carson had a criminal record for assault, theft and domestic violence. However, she said, “They should have taken different precautions.”
The brother:
Carson worked at Green Circle Growers in Oberlin, was laid off and had since gotten another job. Green said he knows his brother had a criminal past, liked to fight and had been behind bars on and off since he was 17 years old. Despite Carson’s past, Green said the situation could have been resolved differently.
Sorry, all, but I still stand by what I said, since we know that it doesn’t take much to sue for wrongful death in this country. Should the guy have been trying to go through a window he knew was unlocked, into a house that wasn’t his? Of course not, however, I’m pointing out exactly what some overzealous County Attorney might use to prosecute (County Attorney’s are politicians, afterall), or the family might use as an excuse to sue. Unfortunately, getting sued by the family of a dead perp happens more than anyone is aware of and all I’m pointing out is this sounds like it will end up going down that path, especially since the family of the dead perp isn’t very happy with the Dillon family.
Old Trooper , I’m going to have to agree with you on this one. I have had police experience (as a cop) and would agree that, if the window was left open and the occupant laying in wait, there is definitely a good chance of the shitbags family coming after them in court.
If the window was relocked, regardless of the posture of the occupant (laying in wait or not) then they would have a harder time of it.
You might want to read the Ohio statute I cited above. It appears to bar recovery of damages for lawful actions taken against those in the process of committing a felony. And it also appears to specifically (1) authorize use of deadly force without retreat if someone has unlawfully entered your home and poses a threat, and (2) explicitly presumes the use of such force to be legitimate self-defense unless the evidence clearly indicates otherwise.
Bottom line: unless this guy is convicted of a crime, I think the dead perp’s family is SOL when it comes to a lawsuit. And so long as he sticks to his story that the perp lunged at him, unless the DA has solid forensic evidence indicating otherwise I don’t think any jury will convict him here.
When I was about 16, and my grandfather was in his late 70’s, he said, “one day, it will be the decent folks who are locked up, and the criminals will run free on the streets.”
I laughed when he said that. I thought he was just being a silly old man.
So now it’s coming to the point of being ILLEGAL to leave a window unlocked? When the criminal crossed the window’s threshold, he broke the law. It doesn’t — and SHOULDN’T — matter if the window was locked or not. Or closed or not, for that matter. HE DIDN’T BELONG THERE. PERIOD.
When we start giving a criminal rights inside another person’s home, on another person’s property, or with another person’s body, we’re done. Finished. At that point we might as well kick all the thugs out into the street and lock ourselfs into the prisons, because that’s where we’ll be in reality, anyway.
@ #6: I understand exactly what you are saying, and think I understand why. Fortunately, entrapment standards usually only apply to law enforcement personnel and not to civilians. (Not that this in any way approximates true entrapment, but that is exactly the sort of argument that would be made.)
Fact remains that the crook would not now be dead at the hands of this homeowner had he either not entered the home that was not his or made a threatening move on the homeowner.
Maybe I misread something but nowhere in the article does it mention whether the window was left unlocked or if the home owner relocked it. For all we know (since the article is vague) the window was locked again and the perp used a different means to enter the home. Either way, the scumbag got what he deserved. And since the Ohio Castle Doctrine law doesnt seem to allow for the family members to sue, I doubt that will go anywhere unless the homeowner is actually charged with a crime.
There was considerable debate on the link as to whether or not the homeowner should have locked the window….why? Are we now saying that we are obligated when we go to sleep to never leave a window open for fresh air for fear our homes might be violated? I like criminals being afraid of getting killed regularly during the commission of their crimes far better than I like the idea of everyone being so afraid of being sued they must always lock a window at night….
I much prefer this outcome, if you are not an invited guest stay the f#ck out of other people’s homes in the middle of the night through a window….or your sorry criminal 4ss could end up shot dead.
If this 4sshole had been my brother, instead of telling everyone what a terrible thing his death during a crime was, I would have held his head in a bucket of water until he stopped wiggling so my family would never be embarrassed by his criminal acts.
Here’s the thing: the meatsack’s family is free to terrorize the Dillons. Nuisance lawsuits, 9-11 calls, swatting, keying the cars.
Be interesting to see if the meatsack’s family has the strength of character to refuse petty revenge, or if they are of the same quality as the meatsack.
Unless Meatsack told the homeowner he was coming back through that window, there can’t be any premeditation or ‘setup’. As far as I know, homeowners and citizens have no legal obligation to lock windows, even if they are normally locked. The homeowner simply suspected something might be up, and decided to take precautions in case there was. He didn’t know that Meatsack was coming back, just wondered if that window was unlocked for a reason. It turns out he was right, and the good guys win one for a change. While some folks would like to say otherwise, there’s nothing wrong with the bad guys getting it in the neck now and then.
True social justice will be when meatsacks family has to pay for the clean up of this guys house for their dirtbag brother bleeding all over it. Breaking the law is bad, and criminals should be punished, not rewarded.
@17: I understand what you’re saying and agree (I would probably lock the window, personally, but that’s just me), however, I don’t believe in giving the family of the dead perp any wiggle room to sue me, because even if I win the case, I still lose, since I have to pay a lawyer many thousands of dollars to defend me in civil court. That’s all I’m saying.
I must be missing something here. Growing up on a ranch, trespassers (meaning those whom are uninvited and or not welcome to be on ranch property) were always regarded to be in an untenable position. Theft of property be it household possessions, fuel, equipment, vehicles, livestock and wild game (rustling for you city folks)were a constant reminder that we had to be very vigilant. Used to be your property line delineates where the trespass begins. For the ranch it was the cattle guard down on the county road where it ended and our road began and all four boundary fence lines with the obligatory “Private Property No Trespassing” warning signs posted at the proper intervals. Same as a military installation, go figure.
Be that as it may, once meatsicle here crossed the property line, he forfeited any and all rights he’d normally have on a public thoroughfare, public space or sidewalk except to leave the property and never return. Or, return and attempt to leave with any of the property listed above. It’s guaranteed, lead is going down range and on target.
streetsweeper: different jurisdictions have different laws regarding lawful use of deadly force. In some (formerly many) jurisdictions, even today deadly force is authorized only as a last resort to protect life and limb – including within one’s own residence or on one’s own property. Thankfully, more and more states have (1) passed laws reducing restrictions on lawful firearms ownership, and (2) have enacted strong castle doctrine and stand your ground laws since 1986. Both IMO are good things we never should have moved away from (as a society) in the first place.