Where did this guy go wrong?

[Emptymag]

"I thought he grabbed a gun from the car."

BLAM! BLAM! BLAM!

[Hawk]

Berry messed up twice. IIRC, you can't defend property in PA with lethal force. Berry's claim of self-defense is bullshit, he was just pissed and had a "hammer" as his only tool, so everything looked like a "nail" to him.
A toolbox is not worth a person's life or the hassle of the court system.

[streaker69]

I wonder if the perp took out the proper insurance on the rental car?

[bogey1]

Career criminal? Its not where the shooter went wrong,
its where did the DA go wrong.

[TaePo]

Berry messed up twice. IIRC, you can't defend property in PA with lethal force. Berry's claim of self-defense is bullshit, he was just pissed and had a "hammer" as his only tool, so everything looked like a "nail" to him.
A toolbox is not worth a person's life or the hassle of the court system.

IANAL.

This is partly misunderstood. You can even pursue if hot pursuit to recapture stolen property. No, you can't use deadly force, however, if the perp / suspect resists with or threatens deadly force in the process, you can use deadly force as they escalated it. Now this is not to say you won't have problems or a trial or get scared into pleading guilty...

[cham09]

where did he go wrong?

He defended property with lethal force (wasnt in the vehicle at the time or being forcibly removed), was in his house and grabbed a weapon, went outside and confronted the person.

He shot at him once, then shot at him again when he returned (sounds like he didnt contact police after the first incident).

Is it still some BS? yeah, but, legally I'd say thats where he went wrong

IANAL

[marinville]

Berry messed up twice. IIRC, you can't defend property in PA with lethal force. Berry's claim of self-defense is bullshit, he was just pissed and had a "hammer" as his only tool, so everything looked like a "nail" to him.
A toolbox is not worth a person's life or the hassle of the court system.

Someone stealing shit from my vehicle is getting confronted, and I always have a gun. Whether or not the guy gets shot is entirely dependent upon his next action. I suggest dropping my shit and running away. Expressing his deepest sorrow and regret is optional, but it also couldn't hurt.

This seems perfectly reasonable to me. And no, I wouldn't shoot the guy if he wasnt a threat, but I'd damn sure prevent him from leaving with my stuff.

[wanneroo]

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.

The fact the criminal returned after already being shot at would tell me the criminal is coming back to do harm as any sane person would beat feet and scram.

Criminals that end up with lead poisoning while committing felonies I care not a wit about.

[hog45]

The article is too limited in its explanation.

The first instance sounds like legitimate self defense. He is allowed to go outside and try to recover his own property and is allowed to intervene with a trespasser. The shooting only occurred after the perp advanced in a threatening manner. I say that is a legit shoot.

The second time around would also be legit, but the article does not say the circumstances.

Was the shooter inside his house shooting through a window while the perp drove away?
Was the perp in the car or walking toward the car?
Where was the shooter in relation to the perp?
Was it still night?

The verdict hinges on stuff like that. Shooting through your window at a guy driving away is going to get you in trouble. We simply don't know enough to say what happened.