https://www.nola.com/news/crim...f2-43139d5ad5da.html
In Lacombe double homicide, two wounded home invaders face murder charges.

Two armed men from a group of four that barged into a Lacombe home, only to have the homeowner pull a gun and shoot at all of them, face charges of first-degree murder, armed robbery and home invasion, the St. Tammany Parish Sheriff's Office said Thursday. The other two are dead, and the homeowner is not facing charges.

The Sheriff's Office said deputies obtained warrants to arrest Renard Causey Sr., 43, and Jason LeBlanc, 22, both of Lacombe, when they are released from a hospital. LeBlanc is in critical condition, Causey in stable condition.


Two killed, three wounded in Lacombe house; 4-year-old among the injured
The confrontation occurred Tuesday when four armed men entered a home on Palmer Drive for reasons the Sheriff's Office has not explained. The homeowner told deputies he fired at the men.


Sheriff's Office spokesman Scott Lee said multiple shots were fired but that investigators don't know how many or by whom. He called it a complex crime scene and said the case remains under investigation.

Two of the intruders were pronounced dead at the scene: Renard Causey Jr., 25, son of one of the wounded, and Justin Hill, 21, of Hammond. Causey Sr. and LeBlanc were wounded, as was a 4-year-old child who lives at the home. The child is expected to make a full recovery, the Sheriff's Office said.

The Sheriff's Office said it plans to book Causey Sr. and LeBlanc with first-degree murder because their actions resulted in the deaths of their co-conspirators.

43 year old father takes his 25 year old son to participate in a home invasion, son is killed, and father is charged with son's murder. That's a pretty clear indication that father has failed at life.

quote:

...The other two are dead, and the homeowner is not facing charges.

He should be awarded a Good Citizen Medal, instead.

taking out the trash

it's generally not reported -- but i always wonder how the homes end up targeted

---------------------------------

I'm waiting to hear the rest of the story.

Four armed home invaders. Precisely why I keep a loaded AR with an attached weapon light next to the bed. I don't plan on facing a home invader. I plan on there being 10 armed invaders crashing through my front door.

what Jeff Cooper would describe as a feat of arms. Well done, but as previously stated, what’s the rest of the story.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

...The other two are dead, and the homeowner is not facing charges.

He should be awarded a Good Citizen Medal, instead.

I think that it's important to note that for all we know, the victim in this case shot these four offenders not to be "a good citizen" (as in meting out justice), but to defend his own life and that of others. We all need to make a distinction between vigilantism and taking necessary defensive actions, otherwise we play into the hands of those who accuse gun owners of "wanting to play judge, jury, and executioner."

a portion of my giant powerball lottery winnings will go to him and his family for security up grades.

hell I might even start Sig Forum thread so people can enter others in the same scenario.

quote:

Originally posted by Krazeehorse:
I'm waiting to hear the rest of the story.

Happened Dec 10. We should’ve heard it by now.

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
43 year old father takes his 25 year old son to participate in a home invasion, son is killed, and father is charged with son's murder.

I've never agreed that the co-conspirator should be charged with murder when one is killed ~ if he didn't do it.
No doubt there should be serious consequences for his otherwise actions.
It seems inaccurate to me to charge him with murder and just an excuse to charge him with something.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
43 year old father takes his 25 year old son to participate in a home invasion, son is killed, and father is charged with son's murder.

I've never agreed that the co-conspirator should be charged with murder when one is killed ~ if he didn't do it.
No doubt there should be serious consequences for his otherwise actions.
It seems inaccurate to me to charge him with murder and just an excuse to charge him with something.

Maybe the justification was that the father and son intended to murder someone, someone was killed, just not the intended target. The father's actions directly led to his son's death.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
43 year old father takes his 25 year old son to participate in a home invasion, son is killed, and father is charged with son's murder.

I've never agreed that the co-conspirator should be charged with murder when one is killed ~ if he didn't do it.
No doubt there should be serious consequences for his otherwise actions.
It seems inaccurate to me to charge him with murder and just an excuse to charge him with something.

If the co-conspirators didn’t stage the invasion, nobody, including the innocent four year old boy, would have been hurt or killed. Their decision to commit the crime was the proximate cause of everything that happened.

Decisions have consequences. These scholars had to know someone might end up dead. Charging the person most responsible for the circumstances that resulted in a homicide seems fair...the dad certainly contributed to the death of his son.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
43 year old father takes his 25 year old son to participate in a home invasion, son is killed, and father is charged with son's murder.

I've never agreed that the co-conspirator should be charged with murder when one is killed ~ if he didn't do it.
No doubt there should be serious consequences for his otherwise actions.
It seems inaccurate to me to charge him with murder and just an excuse to charge him with something.

I'm good with it.

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
43 year old father takes his 25 year old son to participate in a home invasion, son is killed, and father is charged with son's murder.

I've never agreed that the co-conspirator should be charged with murder when one is killed ~ if he didn't do it.
No doubt there should be serious consequences for his otherwise actions.
It seems inaccurate to me to charge him with murder and just an excuse to charge him with something.

If the co-conspirators didn’t stage the invasion, nobody, including the innocent four year old boy, would have been hurt or killed. Their decision to commit the crime was the proximate cause of everything that happened.

Often written here, don't start none - won't be none.

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
43 year old father takes his 25 year old son to participate in a home invasion, son is killed, and father is charged with son's murder.

I've never agreed that the co-conspirator should be charged with murder when one is killed ~ if he didn't do it.
No doubt there should be serious consequences for his otherwise actions.
It seems inaccurate to me to charge him with murder and just an excuse to charge him with something.

Maybe the justification was that the father and son intended to murder someone, someone was killed, just not the intended target. The father's actions directly led to his son's death.

Felony Murder rule. Absolutely appropriate. If you participate in a felony that provides a high degree of risk to innocent victims or participants in the crime and someone dies as a result, every damn one of those co-principals should be held legally responsible. Each could have stopped the crime before it occurred, maybe by doing nothing more than voicing objections to the others. Each contributed to the death by encouraging other to participate in the criminal acts.

In California, the felony murder rule was removed by the same leftist idiots you complain about routinely. Now the guy that drives the getaway car and those other morons who point guns at the victims of a robbery which results in a murder(s) won't be charged with the deaths, only the actual shooter(s) IF that person(s) is identified. Minors committing gang related driveby shootings will have ZERO incentive to identify adults that encouraged the crime, because they're no longer being charged as adults in many counties and are OUT no later than age 25. It's madness.

For Californians, there is now no reason to have compassion on those who partake in a home invasion. The intended victim may as well let loose with his firearm, as justice will not be served by the courts. The co-conspirators may come back for revenge, and one should defend their family as best they can.

Fortunately, this was Louisiana. And yes, the felony murder rule is fair and just.

quote:

Originally posted by KMitch200:

quote:

Originally posted by pulicords:
I've never agreed that the co-conspirator should be charged with murder when one is killed ~ if he didn't do it.
No doubt there should be serious consequences for his otherwise actions.
It seems inaccurate to me to charge him with murder and just an excuse to charge him with something.

quote:

Felony Murder rule. Absolutely appropriate. If you participate in a felony that provides a high degree of risk to innocent victims or participants in the crime and someone dies as a result, every damn one of those co-principals should be held legally responsible

Okay I’m confused by the above.
Do you “never agree that the co-conspirator should be charged with murder” or is it “Absolutely appropriate”??

You’ve messed up your quotes. Go back to the original exchange. It was smschulz who posted the top paragraph, and Pullicords responding in the second paragraph.