Where did this guy go wrong?

[internet troll]

He shot the guy who stole from him. Because of the circumstances the criminal brought charges against him. The homeowner got a suspended sentence.

BRIDGEPORT - A city resident who shot a man breaking into his van was given a suspended sentence Friday.

George Berry, 30, pleaded guilty to first-degree assault for shooting Nicholas Aviles, a career burglar, in the face.
He was sentenced by Superior Court Judge Robert Devlin to a suspended five year term followed by three years’ probation.
Berry’s lawyer, Michael Riley, declined comment. But Aviles, who is currently serving 44 months in prison for prior larcenies, vigorously objected to the plea bargain and demanded Berry get prison time.
In the early morning of Dec. 16, police were dispatched to Mill Hill Avenue for a complaint of a burglary.

Berry told officers he had awoken shortly before 3 a.m. by the sound of what he thought was food burning in a crock pot. After checking the crock pot Berry looked out the window and saw a man breaking into Berry’s work van that was parked on the street, police said. A car, Berry didn’t know, was parked in the driveway.
Police said Berry told them he grabbed his .38-caliber handgun which he has a permit for and ran outside. Berry said the burglar, who was carrying Berry’s tool box, turned towards him in a threatening manner so Berry fired four shots at him.
The man then ran off, police said.

But a short time later, the man, later identified as the 27-year-old Aviles, returned to get his rental car that he left parked in the driveway, police said. Berry began shooting at him again, striking the car and wounding Aviles in the face as Aviles drove off, police said.
Officers later picked up Aviles on outstanding warrants and, noticing he had a bullet wound in his face realized he had been the one shot by Berry, police said.
Police said Aviles admitted to being shot by Berry while stealing the tool box from the van but he denied doing anything threatening to Berry and proclaimed that he wanted to press charges against Berry

[Parrisk]

He went and entered into a confrontation.. firearms are for protection not to play police..

didn't sound like the guy was a threat until approached or the second time he returned..

However.. what would you do?

[pacodelahoya]

Should have been a better shot and not left a scumbag to bear false witness against him.

[GinzoMatic]

Should have been a better shot and not left a scumbag to bear false witness against him.

This is why I would consider the .38 a poor choice for HD.

[TaePo]

He went and entered into a confrontation.. firearms are for protection not to play police..

didn't sound like the guy was a threat until approached or the second time he returned..

However.. what would you do?

First IANAL.

You can confront criminals. If they threaten deadly force then you can respond with deadly force. If they resist your arrest you can match force to affect an arrest.

What is questionable is the second time the robber returned to pick-up the car at a later time. Without threatening the homeowner / owner of the van and being shot straight away.

If I were on a jury, I would not vote guilty. In my mind, the original threat still stands and the homeowner, not realizing the car of the robber / burglar was nearby, shot him right away. He probably expected the perpetrator was back and possibly armed to finish the threat / kill him. Why would he have to wait and see what the intentions were? The suspect already showed a propensity to do harm and has suddenly showed back up. The actor is not acting as an agent of the state so he actually has less requirements than a police officer charged with making an arrest. The homeowner only needs to defend himself or show a deadly threat existed or was made.

That is my opinion on the matter. And there should be no civil case either. The suspect is not "pure as the driven snow".

[Mitch10mm]

I’d say the second appearance by the guy and shooting just because he had opportunity. The first time I’d think he was okay if he expressed and was convincing of fearing for his life.
Given the circumstance I’d probably confront someone stealing tools from my truck. I don’t consider that “playing police”. Granted, society has changed, all guns are bad and “wait for police” is the battle cry.

I think things would change if people stopped being victims and stood up to thugs. (Within reason of course). If I see my son or someone else close to me being assaulted on my front lawn I’m not going to just be “a good witness”.

[internet troll]

But a short time later, the man, later identified as the 27-year-old Aviles, returned to get his rental car that he left parked in the driveway, police said. Berry began shooting at him again, striking the car and wounding Aviles in the face as Aviles drove off, police said.

I'm guessing that he got in trouble for shooting at the guy when he came back. The argument could be that you don't know if he is a threat or not.
My thoughts are I would not have shot at this point, but can completely understand someone doing so. The criminal is returning to the scene of the crime. You don't know his intent. Reading it as he is returning to harm you is a completely understandable concern and it should not be incumbent upon you to wait until he tries to do you harm in that case.

[TaePo]

"27-year-old Aviles, returned to get his rental car that he left parked in the driveway, police said"

Seems to me he came back and was in the shooter's driveway / property. I assume this is in front of the house. So is he back to get the shooter? Would you expect a rental in your driveway? Did the burglar drive the car towards the shooter (a face shot means its possible or was he backing up)?

In any case, the shooter pled guilty so it is a moot point.

[Walleye Hunter]

The shooter probably screwed up and talked. He should have just let a lawyer do his talking for him.

[vinnyg101]

Where did this guy go wrong?


Moving and/or staying in CT is my guess.