Smoking Hot New Case on Self-defense in the Home where intruder claims to be Police

[Fargo]

TROTTER v. STATE, No. 29A02-0910-CR-974, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 10, 2010).


http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/09101002tac.pdf

Regarding the first factor enunciated in Cole, the time that elapsed between the illegal entry and the officers’ alleged observations of Trotter pointing a firearm was not significant. Regarding the second factor, we disagree with the trial court’s conclusion that Trotter’s alleged act of pointing a firearm constituted an intervening circumstance. . . . Here, the evidence in question – the officers’ observations – was obtained almost simultaneously with the unlawful entry. Trotter’s alleged act of pointing a firearm was merely a response to the police misconduct, had a direct and immediate causal connection to the misconduct, and clearly was not an independent intervening circumstance. A person has the right to point a firearm at an intruder in his residence until he is able to confirm the intruder’s identity and purpose, even during a warrantless intrusion in the middle of the night by persons claiming to be police officers. In sum, nothing occurred between the illegal entry and the officers’ observations to break the causal chain.

We further conclude that Trotter's alleged act of pointing a firearm was a direct response to the police misconduct, and in no way does Trotter's behavior make the police misconduct any more reasonable. While the trial court made much of the fact that Trotter had other options in responding to the police entry, we will not hold Trotter to a higher standard of reasonableness than the trained professionals who unlawfully invaded his residence in the night. 3

I was actually more than a little surprised the Ct. of Appeals came out this strongly on the issue.

Joe

 

[88GT]

A person has the right to point a firearm at an intruder in his residence until he is able to confirm the intruder’s identity and purpose, even during a warrantless intrusion in the middle of the night by persons claiming to be police officers.

Bears repeating.

And to think there are some who accept that the lawyers and judges can make the defense of life secondary to the law simply because some black robed says it is.

Regardless of the intruder's actual LE status, a badge is not immunity from and grounds for revocation of the homeowner's rights to self defense. Play stupid games...

 

[Boilers]

Post a copy of that decision on doors/windows to your home.

 

[TJSieling]

Bears repeating.

And to think there are some who accept that the lawyers and judges can make the defense of life secondary to the law simply because some black robed says it is.

Regardless of the intruder's actual LE status, a badge is not immunity from and grounds for revocation of the homeowner's rights to self defense. Play stupid games...

This is part of the reason people who carry are taken as the bad guys, even though we are defending ourselves. I'm glad they sided with the home owner.

 

[jbombelli]

I read the whole thing, and I have to say I like this decision.

 

[mrjarrell]

The bad part is that you're liable to be shot and killed asserting your rights. The ruling doesn't do you a lot of good when you're lying an a pool of your own blood. Nice to see a judge get it right, tho.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Post a copy of that decision on doors/windows to your home.

sounds like a damn fine idea!!!


A person has the right to point a firearm at an intruder in his residence until he is able to confirm the intruder’s identity and purpose, even during a warrantless intrusion in the middle of the night by persons claiming to be police officers.

Better Have the paper out and be saying SEARCH WARRANT !!! Boys.

Obviously this includes a entrance based on a 911 hang up like we were talking about the other day. dont come in my house unless you got papers or have a death wish, i dont care who you are.

 

[mrjarrell]

A person has the right to point a firearm at an intruder in his residence until he is able to confirm the intruder’s identity and purpose, even during a warrantless intrusion in the middle of the night by persons claiming to be police officers.

Does it apply if they have a warrant?

 

[jbombelli]

Does it apply if they have a warrant?

I would bet that it does not, because then they have legitimate reason to make entry. Unless of course their warrant is for the house down the street.

 

[RichardR]

There was a rash of home invasions some years ago where the invaders yelled "POLICE" and stuff while kicking in the various homeowners doors.

But either way it wouldn't matter what they yelled as they kicked in my door or how I reacted, I am a law-abiding citizen with absolutely no expectation of the police ever obtaining a warrant, either arrest or search, for me or my home.

So my automatic assumption would be that the act would be a criminal one.

 

[E5RANGER375]

There was a rash of home invasions some years ago where the invaders yelled "POLICE" and stuff while kicking in the various homeowners doors.

But either way it wouldn't matter what they yelled as they kicked in my door or how I reacted, I am a law-abiding citizen with absolutely no expectation of the police ever obtaining a warrant, either arrest or search, for me or my home.

So my automatic assumption would be that the act would be a criminal one.

yeah there was also a case of crooked IMPD officers doing this and robbing people. they got arrested by the FBI and are all now in prison I believe.

 

[IndySSD]

yeah there was also a case of crooked IMPD officers doing this and robbing people. they got arrested by the FBI and are all now in prison I believe.

Wow, link to any related stories? I never heard of this.

 

[jeremy]

+1 to the Courts on this one!!!

 

[GLOCK1982]

It would seem that as long as you have no reason for the police to be in you home in the first place it would be easy to make the assumption that if someone comes to your house in the middle of the night claiming to be law enforcement you should be leary of it. It would all depend on your personal circumstances

 

[E5RANGER375]

Wow, link to any related stories? I never heard of this.

here is one article on it from a quick google search. im sure you can find more. they were convicted.

3 IMPD Officers Arrested On Drug Charges - Indiana News Story - WRTV Indianapolis

 

[E5RANGER375]

It would seem that as long as you have no reason for the police to be in you home in the first place it would be easy to make the assumption that if someone comes to your house in the middle of the night claiming to be law enforcement you should be leary of it. It would all depend on your personal circumstances

it would be very nice to assume that, but as we have learned through MANY cases of police mistakes and also intentional illegal actions involving home entries, we know that NO ONE is safe from having this happen to them. EVERYONE, no matter how law abiding should be prepared for any scenario, because it has happened to many innocent people.

It would also be nice to assume I could trust every police officer I came across daily, but thats also been factualy proven to not be the case many times. Thats why I cant trust any person in uniform unless I personaly know them.

 

[PatriotPride]

Excellent ruling! It's nice to see common sense affirmed every once in awhile. Don't force entry into people's homes wrongfully and then wonder why there's a gun pointed in your face. Seems like a self-correcting problem to me.

 

[jbombelli]

it would be very nice to assume that, but as we have learned through MANY cases of police mistakes and also intentional illegal actions involving home entries, we know that NO ONE is safe from having this happen to them. EVERYONE, no matter how law abiding should be prepared for any scenario, because it has happened to many innocent people.

It would also be nice to assume I could trust every police officer I came across daily, but thats also been factualy proven to not be the case many times. Thats why I cant trust any person [STRIKE]in uniform [/STRIKE]unless I personaly know them.

Fixed it for you. Oh, wait... that's how *I* feel...

 

[PatriotPride]

Fixed it for you. Oh, wait... that's how *I* feel...

The "any person" is implied. The uniform is merely an extension, and a valid one at that, based off of prior experience.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Fixed it for you. Oh, wait... that's how *I* feel...

very true. matter of fact that better shows that its nothing personal against cops. its everyone that gets treated the same.