Here's a link to a story when the event occurred in July:

https://nypost.com/2018/07/30/...in-queens-home-cops/

Here's an article about the DA indicting the man for defending his home:

New York law is an open invitation to home invaders

There is a reason homeowners can rarely afford to dispense mercy on an overnight invader: Criminal intruders tend to be the dangerous type. What homeowners don’t expect are law enforcers and prosecutors going after them for ­defending themselves and their loved ones.

Queens resident Joel Christopher Paul faced a home-intruder threat in the early hours of July 30, 2017. The 27-year-old was home in Springfield Gardens with his mother, brother and sister when someone ­attempted to break in. The intruder was Shamel Shauvo, 26, who had traveled north from Maryland after being named a suspect in a shooting there 10 days earlier.

Expecting a pizza delivery, Paul’s brother, Michael, 16, went to the door and discovered Shauvo trying to break in. Michael forced Shauvo to the surrounding area, and his mother called for help. Joel, adrenaline likely surging through his veins, answered the call — and brought a bat and knife to the confrontation.

By the time it was all over, Shauvo ­received the ultimate lesson in picking the wrong house. He died at Jamaica Hospital after being clubbed and stabbed. The confrontation had all the indications of a break-in gone wrong for the wanted man, and as one high-ranking police source told The Post, the response was justifiable.

Both brothers avoided arrest and remained home after the incident. But months later, Queens DA Richard Brown submitted the case to a grand jury, bringing ruin upon Joel, who has been charged with manslaughter.

A ham sandwich, as the saying goes, can be indicted in grand-jury proceedings completely overseen by prosecutors. But prosecutors shouldn’t have targeted Joel. The stress, ­expense and uncertainty of facing a first-degree manslaughter charge are devastating and can lead to an unjustified plea that could result in Joel going to prison.

Part of the trouble lies with New York’s “retreat doctrine.” A theory fit for law school classrooms, the doctrine holds Joel had a duty to run and hide if it was safe to do so. It’s an obligation Joel, like the vast majority of New Yorkers, had probably never heard of.

Yet it’s likely that the Queens DA will pursue precisely this avenue at trial, since the indictment states that Joel, “with intent to cause serious physical injury to Shamel Shavuo,” caused his death.

While most jurisdictions would have left Joel alone, the Queens DA seems to want to resurrect the city’s bad old days, when prosecutors developed a reputation of ­interpreting laws in ways that protected criminals more than they protected victims.

There is also an abuse of prosecutorial discretion here. The DA should have recognized that Joel was forced to make split-second ­decisions involving defending his vulnerable family members. Even if Shauvo was initially repelled, Joel had no time for a thoughtful ­inquiry into what Shauvo would do next unless he saw Shavuo’s backside running down the block.

Brown’s office should also ­review its own files to get a better sense of the devastation wrought by home invaders over the years. Such a search will reveal unsolved murders, sexual assaults and general terror inflicted on mostly working-class victims.

For a lesson in the threat posed by home invaders, the Queens DA might also recall the notorious 2007 Cheshire, Conn., home-invasion that ended with the murder and sexual assaults of a mother and her two daughters, one of them just 11 years old.

Other home invaders in this country have had remarkable runs, like the Golden State Killer, who allegedly committed numerous ­assaults in the 1970s. Closer to home, a woman in her 20s last week came home to her apartment from a Manhattan bar only to wake up to the nightmare of an unknown man, who tied her up and raped her.

And what if Joel had acted less assertively and Shauvo had grievously injured Joel’s kin or killed one or more of them? Prosecution after the fact would have ­offered no relief. No criminal sentence can put victims back together. Prosecution doesn’t raise the dead nor mend physical and mental ­scars left by crime.

At times, the only defense is an unrelenting offense against a criminal you can ­assume has the worst of intentions. Unless there is more to this case than the DA has let on, those who neutralize criminals who threaten the sanctity of our homes shouldn’t face criminal charges.

Reason number 569,214,437,214 why you should not live in New York City.

Queens is in England, right?
That's what they do.
Protect yourself and go to jail.
Nice.

Thank god I left New York in 1978. That place is fucked.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
Queens is in England, right?
That's what they do.
Protect yourself and go to jail.
Nice.

Untrue.

Someone needs to break-in the home of that DA. Let the ass wipe find out first hand what it feels like.

The next Constitutional Amendment passed should be the right to self-defense.
This should be a universal right to keep these local yahoos from filing irrational prosecutions.

quote:

Originally posted by beltfed21:
Someone needs to break-in the home of that DA. Let the ass wipe find out first hand what it feels like.

Ha! You would more likely take two to the chest one to the head. Run and hide for thee, not for me.

Dude should have definitely picked up both his teenage brother and mother carried them off and retreated. It's one thing to retreat if possible, but how do you retreat for three people? Do we know mom's 40 yard dash speed? Could she outrun a 26 year old man?

quote:

Originally posted by beltfed21:
Someone needs to break-in the home of that DA. Let the ass wipe find out first hand what it feels like.

was going to suggest this very thing

you want to convert a likely democrat DA to a republican, make him the victim of a viscous crime

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
Queens is in England, right?
That's what they do.
Protect yourself and go to jail.
Nice.

Untrue.

Pretty close.
AND I think don't you guys have to have a permit to own a screwdriver since it is the weapon of choice for many?

quote:

Originally posted by Marlin Fan:
Thank god I left New York in 1978. That place is fucked.

I think it was in 1980 when IBM sent me on extended classes in NYC. Our hotel was right across from Grand Central. IBM paid our expenses to us, in the form of checks which then had to be cashed of course. The bank we all used was on the ground floor of the same building where the school was located.

Criminality was so bad that several of us bought cheap sheath knives. Most of us with the knives wore them taped to our forearms when not in class. And, the school staff warned us about traveling alone, recommended at least 3 to a group.

quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:
The next Constitutional Amendment passed should be the right to self-defense.
This should be a universal right to keep these local yahoos from filing irrational prosecutions.

I thought that was what the 2A did!

Wtf? From the title, I thought it was about if the home invader retreated then you can’t continue your positive defense to protect your family or yourself.

Obviously, the charge isn’t about this. They do a shitty job against criminals so it’s the innocents they go after.

quote:

I thought that was what the 2A did!

Apparently not in NYC. Special kind of stupid there. You can bear arms, just can't use them and they can't be firearms unless you're one of the privileged few.
Hopefully a judge or the jury can put things right but the unfortunate real victim will lose all his assets defending himself.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 220-9er,

The craziness in America is unbelievable. Victims are bad,criminals are good. We need to seriously take back this country.

My retreat stops at my front door. I do not retreat from there, if I dont want to. And the man should absolutely be legally allowed to stand toe to toe with a shit stain home invader in his own home, at his own front door.

Wouldn't it be better to make a scene at the front door and potentially scare the guy away, then cower and hide inside your house?

Bull shit. I hate that state.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
Queens is in England, right?
That's what they do.
Protect yourself and go to jail.
Nice.

Large parts of the USA-- in terms of both resident population and and surface area-- are under laws more onerous than England's w/r/t to firearms and self-defense.

that is true

a number of states would much rather see you and your family slaughtered in your own home rather than give you the means to protect yourself

you can probably figure out which states those are

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
Queens is in England, right?
That's what they do.
Protect yourself and go to jail.
Nice.

Untrue.

Pretty close.
AND I think don't you guys have to have a permit to own a screwdriver since it is the weapon of choice for many?

As I said, untrue. Forced entry exercises are very rare here in UK, but most of them end in grief for the breaker-inner. Around 50% of the time they die with their own weapons having been turned on them. And BTW, almost half of my near ten thousand posts here over the last sixteen years have been trying to advise ill-informed people like you of the misconceptions you have bout self-defence in UK.

To tell the truth, I'm about ready to give up on it, seeing as misinformation that you are spouting crops up on a weekly basis. And for what it's worth, I've got nineteen guns in my house, and a LOT of unregistered screwdrivers.