Area man accused of shooting person trying to steal his car

**WhiteFeather** · September 5th, 2008, 11:45 AM

http://pittsburghlive.com/x/valleyin...ce=rss&feed=30

Area man accused of shooting person trying to steal his car

MONONGAHELA - A city man was charged today after allegedly firing at and wounding one of two suspects trying to steal his car.

Robert Walters, 53, of 216 Frye Ave., was charged with two counts each of aggravated assault and simple assault and recklessly endangering another person.

He is accused of shooting at James Kress, 23, of 62 West Katherine Ave., Washington, Pa., and his 16-year-old female accomplice as they allegedly were attempting to steal Walters' car at 3:50 a.m. Aug. 17.

Walters allegedly fired two shots from a 9mm in the direction of Kress and the Carroll Township teen.

One of the shots struck Kress in the leg.

When officers arrived, both Kress and the juvenile had fled the scene.

Monongahela police, with the assistance of Carroll Township officers, located the juvenile nearby and arrested her. She was placed in a juvenile detention center in Jefferson County, Ohio.

Personnel from Tri-Community Ambulance and Monongahela Fire department, using a thermal imaging camera, located Kress in a wooded area along the edge of Pigeon Creek, near Peno's Plaza.

Kress was flown by emergency helicopter to Allegheny General Hospital, where he was treated for what police described as life-threatening wounds.

Kress was charged with criminal trespass, endangering the welfare of children, corruption of minors, possessing instruments of crime, theft from a motor vehicle, criminal conspiracy and loitering and prowling at night.

Charges against Walters and Kress were filed this morning in the office of Magisterial District Judge Mark Wilson, of Monongahela.

Washington County District Attorney Steve Toprani said authorities took into account "the totality of the situation" in determining the charges that were filed. He spoke with Monongahela police Chief Brian Tempest and recommended charges to be filed.

Toprani said the law permits the use of "deadly force" to defend one's home. But, in this case, the shots were fired from within a home at suspects who were outside the home, Toprani said.

"I am a firm believer in the right to defend your home," Toprani said. "But that wasn't the case in this case. We've taken a reasonable view in this case.

"We must send a message to public that we will enforce the law fairly.

Toprani said his stance on the right to bear arms is confirmed both politically and personally, noting that he received the endorsement of some pro-gun lobbies.

"I keep a gun to defend my home, but you have to use them reasonably," Toprani said. "While I respect an individual's right to defend their home, you have to use it in the way the law prescribes."

**sjohn26** · September 6th, 2008, 04:49 AM

And in the past, horse thieves could be shot.

I call it a good shoot - most people depend upon their vehicles for their livlihood - to get to/from work; kids to school, etc.

Why is an auto any different from the home. You steal - you risk the consequences.

**Salt** · September 6th, 2008, 05:32 AM

Originally Posted by sjohn26

And in the past, horse thieves could be shot.

I call it a good shoot - most people depend upon their vehicles for their livlihood - to get to/from work; kids to school, etc.

Why is an auto any different from the home. You steal - you risk the consequences.

I do agree with you to a certain degree. I think the situatuion could have been handled better. I know if I was in this situation I would not have shot the perps.

More than likley, considering it was my home, I would rack a shotgun or full on draw on them with a handgun, maybe even illuminate the area if possible, but wouldnt have shot. Just for the fact that I wouldnt want to be in half the shit that the homeowner is in now.

I just think that there were other ways of taking control of the situation. I couldnt agree more with you, if your going to steal cars, you got some shit coming your way. I have no sympathy for those scumbags.

**ChamberedRound** · September 6th, 2008, 07:44 AM

As it stands the law does not provide for the use of force to protect property. The prosecutors have the right in this case to press charges. I don't like it, I don't agree with it, but the law must be respected.

**chesire17201** · September 6th, 2008, 08:17 AM

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

As it stands the law does not provide for the use of force to protect property. The prosecutors have the right in this case to press charges. I don't like it, I don't agree with it, but the law must be respected.

sadly, i have to agree........don't like it though

**JWS** · September 6th, 2008, 08:23 AM

[QUOTE=Salt;416050] I think the situatuion could have been handled better. I know if I was in this situation I would not have shot the perps.

I agree with Salt... if he was allowed to get away with shooting them this would set bad precedent....best thing would be to video them while calling LOE, of course armed at the time in case they come at you

**sjohn26** · September 6th, 2008, 08:27 AM

[QUOTE=JWS;416111]

Originally Posted by Salt

I agree with Salt... if he was allowed to get away with shooting them this would set bad precedent....

I prefer to call it setting a good example !

**TonyF** · September 6th, 2008, 08:43 AM

Originally Posted by sjohn26

I call it a good shoot

Then we'll probably be reading about you in this forum one of these days.

**crakkajakka15** · September 6th, 2008, 09:58 AM

Yeah people its just property....its insured he would of got the money or the car back in some form or another. His biggest issues would be calling the insurance company while they file a claim and get him a rental car. And if they didnt pay for the rental car, im sure he would be reimbursed somehow by the perps if they were to be caught. This is a perfect example where a non-lethal tool like OC would come into play. Go out and confront them and call police and if need be deploy the OC. Or then at that point if the Perps decided to take more action against him by all means draw down as your life is in danger at that point. Atleast that way it would show you tried to resolve the situation in a non-lethal way before resorting to lethal force. Might not be the right way, but atleast I would be able to cover my butt in court. My 2 cents anyway.

**edstephan** · September 6th, 2008, 10:08 AM

If the BG makes a conscious decision to take someone’s property then they also need to accept the consequences of that decision. That is the problem, the BG’s can get away with theft, murder, robbery, and the like without dire consequences as if they are the victim.
My property means exactly that and for I will defend by any and all means necessary
Ed