By Jeb Bladine • President / Publisher • 

Online map shows Mac crime reports

Only online subscribers may access this article.

One-day subscriptions available for just $2. Subscribe online by clicking here.

Already a subscriber, please .

Comments

CWW

So, does this mean that the homeowner can be charged since the intruder wasn't committing burglary? Really?!?

sbagwell

No, it most emphatically does not. That would be a totally unwarranted assumption.
As we reported just a couple of weeks ago:
In ORS 161.219, state law declares residents justified in shooting home invaders only if they reasonably believe the person at the other end of the barrel is:
n Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against another person.
n Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling.
n Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person.
In other words, all it requires is that the homeowner REASONABLY BELIEVE the intruder is: 1) Commiting or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physiucal force against another person; 2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; 3 Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person.
If he reasonably believes any one of these, even if he turns out to be wrong on all counts, then he is fine. All it requires is a perception of imminent threat, and smashing the glass out to reach in and switch the lock off, after trying to smash the door open with a shoulder, would certainly instill such belief in me.
Rest easy. The perp has been charged, the homeowner has not. And that's not going to change.
Steve

CWW

I agree with your perception of his intent and I think the homeowner did the right thing. Apparently the DA doesn't agree since 'He is being charged with misdemeanors rather than more serious charges related to burglary, which would apply if law enforcement can prove he entered the home with intent to commit a crime.' If law enforcement doesn't think this is felony burglary, then you can't guarantee they won't charge the homeowner. You can't say that what you 'REASONABLY BELIEVE' is the same as what the courts think is reasonable belief. This has been proven time and time again.

Bill B

Thank you for the crime map Mr. Bladine. That's exactly what I was looking for. So, if MPD is slow in reporting where does crime map get its info?

Can we get to the real issue. Based on what I read in the NR the Yamhill County judiciary seems to be extremely lenient in delving out punishment and the DA's office seems to be adverse to trying cases so we end up with plea deals and reduced charges. After reading this article it appears the problem may reside with an overcrowded jail. If that's true, what a shame! Let's increase taxes and build a bigger jail.

As for MPD, take a look at the arrests posted each week. Well over half are for probation violations and court supervision violations. THey would have a lot more time on their hands if the judiciary was handing out jail time rather than probabtion on top of probation.

sbagwell

CWW: The key is is "reasonably believe." All the homeowner has to do is "reasonably believe."
In this case, the DA thinks the homeowner was wrong and so do I.
I think this intrusion was most likely committed by someone who was stoned and/or drunk and just acting out. I think he was out of his gourd and had no comprehension of what he was doing.
If you are trying to burglarize a house, you don't walk up to the front door and start pounding away, thus waking the whole world. And after being rebuffed by a very much present and alert homeowner, who called officers to the scene, the guy kept returning. He even tried to force the door open with the homeowner standing on the other side warning him to cease and desist.
To press a burglary case, you not only have to suspect the guy was actually trying to break in to steal goods or inflict harm, but also to be able to present enough concrete evidence of that to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
Otherwise, the DA is just wasting out tax dollars on a fruitless prosecution. And more than likely, we pay double, because we also get to pick up the tab for the defense lawyer.
What if the guy was armed with no guns, knives or burglary tools, and showed a high level of impairment? How do you make your case then?
I think the homeowner was justified in shooting the intruder on the grounds of reasonable belief regardless. Thus, I think the DA was correct in not charging him. I also think the DA was justified in forgoing felony charges that couldn't be proved in a court of law and going with misdemeanor charges that could be proved, thus will likely produce a plea bargain here in due course.
"Reasonable belief" is a basis for taking immediate action, but not for filing charges and initiating prosecution later on, in the cold light of day, with more facts on the table. I'm making some assumptions here, but I'm pretty confident in the direction this is going as it plays out.

Steve


Janet


I'm assuming then, that or home intruder was breaking and entering for the purpose of something other than committing a crime. Stopping by for coffee perhaps? Surely if, as a homeowner we find some uninvited stranger in our house, we are entitled to feel threatened.

sbagwell

I think that's exactly what I said in my post. I said I thought the homeowner was entitled to feel threatened, and thus entitled to take the action he did in response.
Do I think the intruder, who was, as we reported, trying to break the door down, stopping by for coffee? Of course not.
I think he was stumbling around in a drugged, drunken or mentally disturbed state and probably had no idea what he was doing.
Frightening? To be sure.
Criminal? Most certainly.
But that doesn't ensure he can be prosecuted for a felony crime against people or property. Lacking evidence he came armed with weapons or burglary tools, that would be pretty hard to support.
How do you figure a burglar trying to break down the front door, a home invader showing up unarmed or any criminal forgoing use of stealth to achieve an element of surprise? Does that make even a lick of sense? About as much sense as dropping by for coffee in the wee hours of the morning, I would say.

Steve
Steve

Lulu

Our Yamhill County District Attorney must go.

Jeb Bladine

Bill B,

Responding to your suggestion (received via email), we have placed a link to that Crime Reports Map in our website menu -- in the "News" grouping, just below "Who's In Jail." We will let readers know it's there so that others can easily find the page and check out crime activity in their neighborhoods, anywhere in the city, and beyond.

Jeb Bladine
News-Register

Mac Native 66

Why isn't there a link the said map?

sbagwell

Mac Native:
There is a link. Click on the menu button in the top left corner of the home page, producing a drop-down menu. Click the three-bar element at the right end of the news bar, producing another drop-down menu. The crime map link is at the bottom, just below the jail roster link. Don't click the news button itself, as that will take you to an inside news page. You have to click on the three bars.
Steve

Web Design & Web Development by LVSYS