Aggreser w/ Knife Killed by man w/ CCP

[kcaskey]

Interesting atricle and supporting reason to carry...

Cleaning & Maintenance Management Online :: Brought to you by Grand View Media

 

[ATF Consumer]

"Phelps became angered after an exterminator arrived at his apartment for scheduled maintenance, the story noted."

looks like the caretaker did the exterminating

 

[melensdad]

Interesting article take on things.

Here is an article from MSNBC, please notice the headline . . .

Maintenance Man Shoots, Kills Tenant During Dispute
Victim Due To Be Evicted From NW Fairmount Apartment

Maintenance Man Shoots, Kills Tenant During Dispute - WLWT-TV- msnbc.com
updated 7:46 a.m. CT, Fri., Dec. 19, 2008
CINCINNATI - A maintenance man shot and killed another man Wednesday during a dispute at a Northwest Fairmount apartment building, police said.

Kenneth Phelps, 40, was due to be evicted later this week from his McHenry Avenue apartment, investigators said, and he became irate when an exterminator arrived shortly before 2 p.m. for scheduled maintenance.

“He didn't let the exterminator in, they got the caretaker and he apparently came at the caretaker with a knife, and the caretaker, who has a conceal carry permit, shot him in self-defense,” said Hamilton County Corner O’dell Owens.

Police interviewed the maintenance man, the exterminator and another person who was inside the apartment during the shooting.

No arrests have been made, and the shooting remains under investigation.​

The same story, using the same wording is published in a trade journal for CLEANING & MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT
Cleaning & Maintenance Management Online :: Brought to you by Grand View Media

Here is their headline:

Maintenance man kills in self-defense
​

Notice any difference between the tone of the headlines???

 

[singlestacksig]

boy, that is going to be an interesting case.. if the guy had not yet been evicted then he was in his home...
the caretaker could have been in the wrong....

 

[schwaky18]

boy, that is going to be an interesting case.. if the guy had not yet been evicted then he was in his home...
the caretaker could have been in the wrong....

Good legal thinking, that what I was wondering also.

Did the caretaker force entry into the apartment when the tenant was objecting? Does Ohio have the Castle Doc.? Does the lease state the caretaker can enter at any time? Does case law suppor this if the tenant objects to the entry?

Can we say lawsuit...and maybe criminal charges

 

[indyjoe]

I think the legal right of the owner to enter the apartment and or agents of the owner make the two equally justified in being there. Then it comes down to aggressor/defender. But IANAL.

 

[singlestacksig]

yeah, which trumps? castle doc. or self defense... even if maint. guy had a legal right to be there, he may not have had the legal right to use force.. but person in his home may have had legal right to use force....

I would be if this was in Indiana maint. guy would be in deep doo...

 

[singlestacksig]

I think the legal right of the owner to enter the apartment and or agents of the owner make the two equally justified in being there. Then it comes down to aggressor/defender. But IANAL.

was caretaker the owner?

most states allow one to use force to protect ones home, but not to protect property that is not ones home...

this is why most states require the sheriff to do evictions.. not the property owner.. and only after a court order..

 

[schwaky18]

I think you guys are wrong, Castle Doc. is pretty strong. I think if he said they cannot enter and they forced entry he would fall under the protection of the Castle Doc. It doesn't matter what the lease said this is a contract and all they could do is get him for breach of contract. If they needed in the apt. they would need a writ and a officer to get the guy with Tress. and then the officer can remove him other than that he should be secured in his "castle."
Now, did he exit his apt. when running with the knife?

 

[schwaky18]

I think the legal right of the owner to enter the apartment and or agents of the owner make the two equally justified in being there. Then it comes down to aggressor/defender. But IANAL.

The only legal right the owner had to enter his property was the contract. This isn't even a legal right (statute) but it is a right granted in the contract. That can only be enforced in the term of breach and damages. Not force

 

[singlestacksig]

The only legal right the owner had to enter his property was the contract. This isn't even a legal right (statute) but it is a right granted in the contract. That can only be enforced in the term of breach and damages. Not force

yeah, if this was in IN. and the shootng took place inside the apartment.. i would like to see criminal charges...

 

[Bill of Rights]

boy, that is going to be an interesting case.. if the guy had not yet been evicted then he was in his home...
the caretaker could have been in the wrong....

He had to know he was about to be evicted, and thus, he likely got violent because he thought they were coming to do that that day. Regardless, much will depend upon his lease. Did the apartment complex retain right of entry either for emergencies or for scheduled maintenance? If they did, the case will likely go nowhere.

Blessings,
B

 

[JosephR]

The only legal right the owner had to enter his property was the contract. This isn't even a legal right (statute) but it is a right granted in the contract. That can only be enforced in the term of breach and damages. Not force

He was where he was, forget about who's house it was- it would be like being in public- he does not need to retreat if he feels in danger. (oh this isn't IN)

Then again, if the OTHER person had more of a right to be there, then he was in error.