-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Police: Worcester homeowner shoots, injures man trespassing on his property
- Thread starter mikeyp
- Start date
Evadd
NES Member
That news headline sucks. Leaves off the part about attempted theft, the perp threatening to shoot the homeowner while reaching into his waistband (witnessed), and fighting with him. Sounds like a good shoot to me, except for the "injured" part.
Legal? Debatable and probably not in MA, but at that point I would say it is no longer about property but rather self defense.
Perhaps, in brockton guy had his gun inside his truck, got into a fight over money went back to his truck grabbed his gun another fight and he ended up shooting the kid, no charges
So the person he shot. Zach Bailey is a frequent flyer with a sheet as tall as he is (5'6" ish). Confirmed gang banger and a talented fighter.
funny that LEO can think or feel they are threatened and then can unload on a suspect,suvillian,perp,subject or what ever and its GTG. Home owner gets a threat of getting shot and a perceived draw of a weapon....sounds good to me.
Easy there.... do you really put people on trial based on stuff printed in a rag? lol You're suggesting its illegal for the homeowner to do anything other than hide under his couch and call the kopsch? (and good luck with that in Worcester, by the time they show up, the guy will be gone with your shit).
Also, if you read the article it would appear that he didn't "protect his property with a firearm" or even attempt to do so.... so unless there's some law under MGL that says you cant "shoo" a potential thief away from your property (without deadly force/weapon/etc) his actions may very well not be unlawful.
As much as I hate to say it though there's an upshot to the perp not dying- whenever the perp doesn't die the level of scrutiny goes way down. (I've seen this effect more than once, in Worcester County, BTW.... ) If there's no corpse the DA seems to be much less interested in trying to hang someone.
-Mike
6pm news just said guy was off duty LEO, nothing to see here it was justified. Although it sounds like it was justified, the double standard pissed me off. If that was me they would have unloaded my safes onto a table and took a picture for the papers to run with whatever story they want to portray.
It's sad that we've come to this. He should not be required to shelter in place because he heard an intruder.
He did not use deadly force to protect property. He went outside to investigate, and order the intruder off his property. When threatened with deadly force he shot.
It seems that Zackery Bailey played stupid games, and won stupid prizes.
I suspect the homeowner is no longer licensed to carry, and there will be a public outcry if he isn't charged.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,534
- Likes
- 33,575
There is nothing wrong with escorting a trespasser off your property, or being armed while doing so, though most of us would probably not choose to engage in such a confrontation. A claim of "furtive movement" and "threat to shoot" would get a guaranteed pass for an off-duty LEO, I expect he will be ground up by the system - especially since the other party will no doubt have a different version of events.
Varmint
NES Member
Witnesses said the guy threatened to shoot the homeowner and reached for his waistband. Sounds like a good shoot, but better if the robber was armed.
Varmint
NES Member
makes sense - I was wondering why he wasn't arrested on the spot. That explains why, he's special.
Asaltweapon
NES Member
Changed mind.
WRONG!
You can use reasonable (but not deadly) force to defend property.
This is the Massachusetts Trial Court jury instruction for defense of property:
DPR
NES Member
Obviously you missed the part about the shooter being a cop.
I know Seven, merely helping with facts about the party involved.
so when u do as it says u do you're not guilty right?
Similar threads
