NOPD: Burglar shot by home's resident after alarm goes off

[SpeedRacer]

Get him on here, STAT.

I've tried before, but he's not big on interweb stuff. That's why I sell his guns for him and help him find new ones. I will share any info if I can get ahold of him.

 

[SpeedRacer]

And yes, this is the same R ALCEBO. Maybe now someone will want to buy it.

http://www.bayoushooter.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27886

 

[SirIsaacNewton]

It's about whether or not the guy a threat when he shot him?

But was the homeowner's resolution to the situtation justified?

I will say yes because his family is safe. That is justification in itself. Any other ending besides the one that was decided and followed through by him could have ended with a different result.

 

[charliepapa]

Yah I guess pulling something from ones pocket and stabbing an individual while committing a crime does seem like a bit of a stretch. Your right a criminal in the midst of a crime will definitely comply and act rationally.

Please tell me you're joking. You don't know the situation. Just because the individual didn't have an uzi in hand with an upside down cross tattooed on his forehead doesn't mean he wasn't ready to fight his way out of that garage.

If the guy was on his knees complying begging for his life I am sure the non-criminal in the situation, the homeowner and real victim, would have not shot the guy. For some reason I find that highly unlikely.

Lets not forget what caused this incident to occur not the actions of a man defending his life and property but the actions of a career criminal who could have very well made this into a different story with a lot worse of an ending.

No, I'm not joking. Let's review:

The article states it was in his pocket... Do you think he stowed it on the way down?

Look, all I was saying (in my one line post above) was that the article stated the screwdriver was found still in the dead man's pocket. If the shooter had X-ray goggles on then maybe he identified the screwdriver as a threat (a weapon) but I doubt that's what happened.

At no time in my last post did I attempt to allude to the state of mind of either of the people involved. I have no idea what happened in that garage or what I would have done. I never said anything that could have been construed as such either, so take a break.

 

[SpeedRacer]

Talked to Rene, got more of the story. He asked me not to share details yet, but I can say with 100% confidence that it was a justified shoot.

 

[SirIsaacNewton]

No, I'm not joking. Let's review:



Look, all I was saying (in my one line post above) was that the article stated the screwdriver was found still in the dead man's pocket. If the shooter had X-ray goggles on then maybe he identified the screwdriver as a threat (a weapon) but I doubt that's what happened.

At no time in my last post did I attempt to allude to the state of mind of either of the people involved. I have no idea what happened in that garage or what I would have done. I never said anything that could have been construed as such either, so take a break.

I guess where I lost you is I don't see a criminal in my house reaching, carrying, juggling, smoking, and/or licking a weapon as a threat. I see a criminal in my house as a threat period. Doesn't matter what he has in his back pocket, front pocket, stowed in his rectum, or fanny pack. If a person is in your house with ill intentions I don't need to see a weapon to feel threatened. There are weapons all around him in my garage my golf clubs, my garden shears, my jumper cables, my pugs. Criminal in my house = threat.

 

[charliepapa]

Criminal in my house = threat.

Agreed.

Now, I think the point was, with no weapon visible, would/should you shoot just because you are probably justified by law to do so? I'm no criminal but I know if I was looking up the muzz of a 12 gauge on someone else's turf, I wouldn't make any sudden moves. Obviously, from how it ended, the homeowner got the draw on the intruder.

Tough to call, other than to say I agree on what = threat.

 

[Speedlace]

Talked to Rene, got more of the story. He asked me not to share details yet, but I can say with 100% confidence that it was a justified shoot.

Well it's an "ongoing investigation"; best not to talk about the intimate details until everything is squared away.

 

[smith625]

NICE SHOOTING!!!! Story says shot several times, that's even better.

 

[dantheman]

Well it's an "ongoing investigation"; best not to talk about the intimate details until everything is squared away.

AND , the civil suit has been settled one way or the other . Criminal or not , justified or not , this one is probably far from over .

 

[Speedlace]

New Orleans DA won't prosecute Bywater homeowner who killed burglar

The Orleans Parish District Attorney's Office won't criminally prosecute the Bywater homeowner who fatally shot a burglar while defending his property in February, a spokesman recently announced.

Rene Alcebo, 37, killed 31-year-old Jason Miller with a shotgun shortly after Miller tripped an alarm in Alcebo's detached garage in the 600 block of Independence Street.

According to DA spokesman Christopher Bowman, New Orleans homicide detectives investigated the incident and forwarded their findings to prosecutors for a review process called "a consult." The consult concluded that Alcebo's actions did not warrant criminal charges.

That made Miller's killing a justifiable homicide, said John Gagliano, the New Orleans coroner's chief investigator.

Alcebo's encounter with Miller happened late in the night of Feb. 5, a little after Alcebo received a phone call from his home-security company informing him that a sensor in the garage had registered motion.

Emergency operators dispatched officers to investigate the burglary alarm, New Orleans police said. Alcebo, meanwhile, grabbed a shotgun from his home and went outside to check his garage.

Alcebo shot Miller in the chest shortly after seeing him. Miller died before help arrived to the home. He did not carry any type of weapon but did have "burglary tools" such as a screwdriver and a pair of cutting pliers in his pockets, Gagliano said.

Feb. 5 was not the first time Miller, who lived with some of his relatives in the nearby 700 block of Alvar Street, had been accused of that type of crime. Police had previously booked him with a June 2006 simple burglary, but prosecutors never filed charges against him.

Additionally, NOPD spokesman officer Janssen Valencia recently said detectives have been investigating Miller's possible involvement in a few other break-ins in the neighborhood ever since the incident with Alcebo.

Alcebo said hours after Miller's death that he was glad no one in his family had been hurt.

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2010/05/alcebo-miller-may28.html

 

[Dave328]

The absolute worst thing about this shooting is that Rene had to reclean the gun. I mean, c'mon, who likes cleaning guns?? That, and think of the cost of ammunition for the rounds he now has to replace.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

Great precedence for us.

No weapon and not in "home" but in exterior building on property.


I had been wondering how those variables would play out.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

my question is was the garage attached or a seperate building...now that I think about it.

 

[spanky]

The article specifies "detached garage."

 

[lsu fan]

Would I not be justified in shooting if someone tried to come grab my shotgun from me?

I don't think it matters whether the screwdriver was in his hand, pocket or up his butt. He can easily put an end to me if he chooses to come take my gun... soo, I don't see where the confusion is.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

The article specifies "detached garage."

totally missed that. been working since 0100.



that is awesome, especially here

 

[Nolacopusmc]

Would I not be justified in shooting if someone tried to come grab my shotgun from me?

I don't think it matters whether the screwdriver was in his hand, pocket or up his butt. He can easily put an end to me if he chooses to come take my gun... soo, I don't see where the confusion is.

So if you are CHP or even worse, open carrying, I can just shoot you because you have access to a gun?

 

[Nolacopusmc]

Dude wasn't armed. Homeowner shouldn't have shot him.

You probably figured it out by now, but that is not always correct. We already had the big discussion about this when Ernie and I tied into it. The statute LEGALLY allows for you to shoot by the mere fact that he is there. This is the one time you do not have to specifically articulate "a reasonable fear of death or great bodily injury"

In fact, the statute specifically states "there is a presumption that the use of force was necessary"

I am just glad to see the law worked and there was not an abortion of justice with the good guy being fed the after birth like is normally the case.

14:19. Use of force or violence in defense

A. The use of force or violence upon the person of another is justifiable when committed for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or a forcible offense or trespass against property in a person's lawful possession, provided that the force or violence used must be reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent such offense, and that this Section shall not apply where the force or violence results in a homicide.

B. For the purposes of this Section, there shall be a presumption that a person lawfully inside a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle held a reasonable belief that the use of force or violence was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle, if both of the following occur:

(1) The person against whom the force or violence was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.

(2) The person who used force or violence knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.

C. A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shall have no duty to retreat before using force or violence as provided for in this Section and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force.

D. No finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used force or violence in defense of his person or property had a reasonable belief that force or violence was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a forcible offense or to prevent the unlawful entry.

Acts 2006, No. 141, §1.

 

[RyanB]

If things like this happened more often, maybe the theft rate would be cut down. I wish I could have been at my old home when whoever kicked the door down and stole nearly everything we owned, including my wife's speeding ticket that was laying on the table and didn't have the courtesy to pay it with the cash stolen from the bedroom. They wouldn't be stealing today, I can say that.