Absolutely not - if these people hadn't broken the law and broken into his home and threatened them, none of them would have been killed. Self-defence, pure and simple.

I don't know that I would call that a "tragedy." Sounds like a good outcome for a bad situation. Most states have what is called a "make my day" law. Did this happen in America?

No way! He should be given a medal and a check from Crime Stoppers. I'm bitter because my house was looted in 9/06 by "Katrina victims" and my wife came home and all the windows were broken, everything had been stolen, even dirty clothes, the TV stand, recliners, computers, desks. We lived in an apartment facing away from the complex so it probably looked like they were just moving out. Arr! The cops dusted everything and never got anybody. We had to move far away because my wife's afraid to live in the city limits of any large town now.

No way everyone should have the right in their own home to protect themselves. I hate when people get the raw end of the deal when they are the victims. He should have killed all of them.

Certainly not - the people that broke into the house need to be charged with something, even if he did kill one of them. It was simply self defense.

there is a new law out about self defense. im not sure where you live, but the rules are changing. it is self defense, if there is a weapon in plain sight and you feel like you are being threatened with death.. soo yes. in this situation this is self defense! he should not be charged with anything, he should be given an award.

No. What was he supposed to do? Stand there and get shot and/or chopped to pieces? I think every person should have the right to defend themselves and their loved ones when someone invades their home.

Probably not. If he chased one out into the street and shot him in the back, yes. But, in his house? NO!!!

Are you kidding? Did you ever hear of self-defense? What were his choices? He had a first obligation to retreat if he could. If he could not save his family in any other manner he was absolutely within his rights. I think that is the law--but I am not a lawyer. Morally, I believe that the instant they come into his house, uninvited, threatening, they were due to be killed. But that is not the law. They way you tell the story may not be the exact whole story as it actually happened. Let's look into that also.

1. What about the other three? 2. I'd like to know more abut the story. Why did they break in? Was this part of a drug war? Was it a family feud? Was this a matter of what some people mistakenly call "honor?" 3. House invasion should be followed by instant death. A man's home is his castle.

No. That sounds like self-defense to me.

Here are the two articles that were in the paper. Man accused of shooting home intruder released from custody Posted By Karena Walter, Standard Staff Posted 1 day ago A 22-year-old St. Catharines man accused of shooting to death a home intruder was released from custody on $25,000 bail Monday. Jensen Young, charged with manslaughter, was ordered not to communicate with the three surviving men accused of breaking into his home at 216 Carlton St. on Saturday. The trio are in jail awaiting court dates. Meanwhile, friends of slain 19-year-old Pedro Bello continued to pour condolences and memories on a Facebook page set up in his memory Monday. Bello, a former student at Denis Morris Secondary School and St. Catharines Collegiate, made friends easily and was outgoing, those who knew him say. “He automatically made friends,” Katie Kalagian told The Standard. “He was always joking and laughing.” Kalagian said Bello acted like an older brother to those he knew, was loyal and respected his friends. “There was an energy about him,” she said. “He could reassure you. He could give you advice.” She and friend Bri McLaughlin grew up with Bello, originally from Portugal, after he arrived at St. Nicholas elementary school. They’d spend their summers in Montebello Park until their curfews were up, and as they got older, continued to hang out at parties. “He would call us sisters,” McLaughlin said. “He was always smiling. I’ve never seen Pedro not happy.” They said Bello was a real people person, always out and about with friends. “Even though he might have gotten caught up in stuff, he really was a sweet kid,” McLaughlin said. “We’re just lucky we got to be his friends for so long.” Niagara Regional Police said Bello was shot in the basement of the Carlton Street home just before 2 p.m. Saturday. Police allege he was one of four men who tried to rob Young’s house. The three other alleged perpetrators were pulled over and arrested in a vehicle leaving the Carlton Street area Saturday. Those involved were known to each other, police said, but the motive of the robbery is still being investigated. Major crime detectives were putting the pieces together Monday and would not comment on who owned the gun that shot Bello. Police have said other weapons were recovered, but detectives are still probing what was actually used and by whom. But Young’s mother told The Standard on Sunday that four men broke into the house through the back door with machetes and guns. She said Young was protecting his brothers, and had cuts on his wrists and hands from a struggle. The house and a portion of Carlton Street remained blocked off Monday for the forensic investigation. In St. Catharines court Monday, Young had traded the white paper jumpsuit he’d been wearing in the prisoner’s box the day before for a bright yellow Canada Day Jam T-shirt and khakis. Evidence presented at his bail hearing is under publication ban. Young was released by Justice of the Peace Robert Leggate on his own recognizance, on a $25,000 no-deposit bail. He was ordered to report to police each week and must maintain a curfew between midnight and 6 a.m. seven days a week. Other terms of his release include an order not to consume drugs or have any weapons. Young will live at an address other than the Carlton Street home and must notify police of any changes. His next court date is set for Sept. 30. Jonathan Whalen, 21, Jesse May, 19, and Darvin Argueta, 23, all of St. Catharines, will appear by video in court Friday. All three were charged with robbery with a firearm, break, enter and commit an indictable offence, and forcible confinement. Whalen was also charged with failing to comply with a probation order and possession contrary to order. May faces an additional charge of failing to comply with recognizance of bail and possession contrary to order. Article ID# 1171945 Man faces charges in shooting Twenty-two-year-old charged with manslaughter after four men break into his home Posted By KARENA WALTER STANDARD STAFF Posted 2 days ago Homicide suspect Jensen Young looked solemn as he stood in the prisoner's box Sunday in the white jumpsuit provided by law officials. When asked if he understood the charge of committing the manslaughter of 19-year-old Pedro Bello, the 22-year-old said, "Yes." It was the only word he spoke in a brief court appearance following that of three other St. Catharines men. The trio, along with the dead man, are accused of breaking into Young's home to commit a robbery Saturday. During the home invasion at 216 Carlton St., Young shot Bello dead, police say. "He saved his brothers," Jensen's mother said, crying outside the courtroom. The woman wouldn't give her name, but said she was at work when the incident took place. "They smashed the back door in and came in with machetes and guns. Jensen was in the shower. I was at work. My two youngest ones were asleep," she said, referring to Young's 16- and 18-year-old brothers. She said the men threatened to chop someone up, and Young intervened. "He saved my sons' lives," she said, adding Young has cuts on his wrists and hands from a struggle. She declined to say any more for fear it would hurt the case. Young is scheduled to appear in bail court today. The three other men in custody -- Jonathan Whalen, 21, Jesse May, 19, and Darvin Argueta, 23 -- were remanded to video court on Friday. They were each charged with committing robbery with a firearm, breaking and entering, committing an indictable offence and forcible confinement. Niagara Regional Police said they were called to the Carlton Street home just before 2 p. m. in response to a 911 call that a man was shot and another was injured. When an NRP officer pulled up to the scene, a witness pointed out a vehicle believed to be involved. The officer stopped the vehicle, and when backup arrived, all three occupants were taken into custody. Officers discovered Bello in the basement of the home with a gunshot wound. He was pronounced dead at the scene. A second man, identified as Young, had what police described as "minor" injuries from cuts. He was taken to hospital under police custody. "The motive is still under investigation," said Sgt. Jim Prinsen of the major crime unit. Prinsen said four people were home at the time of the break-in, but declined to say what relationship they had. Neighbours Derek and Denise Yendt said they were driving on Russell Avenue when police cars zoomed by. They arrived home to see a commotion. "There were cops there running out of their cars, with guns drawn," Derek Yendt said. The couple saw a man they recognized, because he often parks on the street, come out of the house with a woman and a man. "He was holding cloth on his arm," Denise Yendt said. "He lay down and collapsed on the ground." The man with him was shirtless and covered in blood, Derek Yendt said. "There were at least eight cars, fire trucks, ambulances." Police thering evidence at the scene Sunday, blocking off a portion of Carlton Street in front of the grey home and detouring traffic down McGhie Street. Prinsen said the scene is being protected until a forensic investigation is completed later this week. "We're continuing the investigation. There's all kinds of avenues and things that need to be done in a case like this." Police said it's believed the parties were known to each other. No other suspects are being sought. Prinsen wouldn't say who the gun belonged to because of ongoing witness interviews and investigation. Police said there were other weapons found at the scene, but wouldn't say what they were. In court Sunday, defence lawyer V. J. Singh waived a reading of the charges against Whalen, May and Argueta and spoke individually to each of them. Acting assistant Crown attorney Alan Tessmer said the Crown was opposed to their releases. The justice of the peace ordered they not have any contact with Young and his family. Whalen was further charged with failing to comply with a probation order and possession contrary to an order. May also faces a charge of failing to comply with recognizance of bail and possession contrary to an order. Bello is Niagara's fifth homicide this year and the third in St. Catharines.

if the guy was killed indoors, it is probably self defense. if the guy was killed outside, then it is probably manslaughter.

You have a right to protect yourself and your family. The law gives you that right. if not, we would all be dead. Justifiable homocide. if what you have stated is true, then this case will be closed as justifiable. When a person breaks into someones home, especially being armed, a homeowner can take any steps necessary, in order to protect himself and his family. This includes taking a criminals life.

Absolutely not! They were committing several crimes by breaking in, being armed and threatening him. He had a right to defend himself.

Not if it is *exactly* as you say. Self-defence has always been a legitimate justification. But often vital facts are omitted in such short statements - such as that the intruders were on their way out and had stopped threatening. Violence is only justified while the threat is in place.

NO You are allowed to defend your home it is well within your right to defend your home and your family. He should noe be shared with ANYTHING!!!

The young man should be given a medal, and the three survivors should ALL be charged with manslaughter.

First thought is no. Self-defense allowed. Second thought is what were the exact circumstances of the shooting? IF the four were already leaving and he shot him in the back it could be another matter. Either way, it's a judgment call that may be best made by the courts

man and to think people voted obama who supports prosecuting people who defend themselves like tihs

No, I don't think so. As long as the man was in the house and felt threatened he shouldn't be.

Are you kidding... its called breaking and entering and being in fear of your life if people busted into my house with guns and machete they wouldnt make through the damn door id meet them there with my glock lock and ready to go... you dont do stupid things like that... id shoot to kill no questions asked!

no way... he was protecting himself! If he gets charged someone has been paid off!

Ummmm duh- of course not. what kind of question is this??

Not if he used reasonable force, but that is not clear from your account.

I believe the law works something like this. You can't shoot a suspicious looking man on your doorstep, but if someone is in your house, actively threatening you/your family, and has a weapon, you can shoot. At that point, you know what their intentions are. It's not like a creepy looking guy came to use your phone and you shot him, someone threatened to kill you. That's self-defense.

He can if he shot them in the back and it looks like they were attempting to leave. The way you said it he could probably beat it with self defense and if convited just appeal and they will probably chnage it.

He should have shot and killed both of them and the city and state should pen a medal on him. It is high time people are allowed to protect themselves with deadly force. Some states now have "Make My Day" laws. A local ad on tv here a police officer says, "It is better to have a gun and not need it than to need one and not have it!" As he goes on, "we police can't be everywhere and it takes time to get there. People need to be able to protect themselves with out reprecussions from the law.

From what information you provided absolutly not. Laws vary from state to state, but a person has a right to defend themself or a third party from just the threat of killing someone. The weapons put the icing on the cake. If the prosecutor is good, the other three men will probably be charged with attempted murder. Here in NY, a legitimate reason to use deadly physical force against another person is because you were afraid for your life or that of a third party. Example: Someone threatens to kill you and you see they have a weapon, you may use deadly physical force to prevent the person from harming you.

what state did this happen in? that greatly effects the outcome of criminal proceedings.

Terribly similar to a British case where a farmer shot and killed one of several intruders in his home. He was convicted of manslaughter much to the indignation of a large proportion of the population. The deciding factor was that the gun wasn't registered and was therefore an illegal weapon.

He should be given a medal for bravery! I would do the same damn thing.

no..absolutely not..he was defending a territory... do u kill a dog for peein on a tree...same concept... i guarantee if someone broke into my home id make sure they never broke into another home... we all have the right to bear arms and protect what is ours!

For defending his home and family? Unless there are extenuating circumstances absolutely not!

He shouldn't be charged. The other suspects should have a long prison term, and the man who shot one of those idiots should be given a medal for acting with bravery and conviction to keep safe his life and the lives of his family. I do not consider this a tragedy. If you invade a man's home with weapons and are a threat, your life is riding on the odds of whether or not the homeowner is armed. Your life is then forfeit. Plain and simple.

There is no way he could be charged with manslaughter and justice be served after having had his residence broken into and being threatened with either great bodily harm or being killed. Award him a metal instead.The day is soon coming when self defense will be considered a crime by the judicial system!

Hell no he shouldn't be charged with manslaughter.. Someone came at them in their home with a gun (when I say came at them I don't mean they rushed towards them with the gun and machetes okay) how about asking this question, if someone broke into your house and threatened you and your little brothers, don't tell me you wouldn't bust a cap! I know I would..

no he absolutley should not ....that is self defence and that child was scared!

HECK NO HE SHOULD NOT BE CHARGED AT ALL! I don't know what state this was in, but it doesn't matter actually. If someone breaks in your house armed threatening the young man with his life and his younger brother, then he can shoot and kill the people. First of all those robbers did a armed home invasion and threatened 2 lives. In ANY STATE, if you feel like you life in harms way, when somebody breaks into your house, and threatens to kill both of them, they have the right to shoot and kill. It doesn't even matter if the boy was under age and he had dad's gun. In my state, Texas, you can shoot to kill someone even if they are off your property leaving after breaking in a persons house. Or if somebody is trying to break in your car, NOT on your property, it's allowed. You can buy Assault Rifles at age 18 registered at gun stores in Texas. But you have to be 21 to buy a pistol. I don't get that.

No because it was self defence, think of it as this if someone walks up and punches you in the face wat would you do? would you punch them back. or would you stand there and get beat up.

This person needs to get a real good lawyer . He was protecting himself and his family. For the people that broke in they are the ones that need to charged with the attempt to hurting people and breaking into a home. Poor guy. He does not deserve this he was protecting his family from harm. He needs to be reward not prosecuted. I'd sue the court for misjudgment.

No he should be honored for reminding others that it is not cool to break into someone's house. I would have killed all of them if they broke into my house with weapons. Then I would call the cops and proudly tell them how I legally protected my family.

That's insane! In our State, if a criminal dies during the commission of a crime, his PARTNER gets charged with the murder. Not the VICTIM!

He might be guilty of just one thing: undue restraint. he should have shot and killed all four.

Depends on what state you are in to define the elements of self-defense. In general, you are supposed to limit the force to that which is necessary to defend yourself. I think Texas and Colorado allow residents to shoot intruders. Check out the "make my day laws" in Colorado referenced on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine_in_the_United_States

Hell no, wouldn't be in Texas. We have the right to protect ourselves

No... He should be cannonized and made a hero *if by, one shot and killed the other means that a good guy shot and killed a bad guy?

He should be given a medal.

I'd fire a gun too if it was a matter of getting shot or shoot someone. I mean he was protecting himself and his loved ones. If they can prove all the other men were armed (and dangerous) then it will be self defense. If it was obvious they were not going to shoot than police will think of it as a whole different story. Its really crappy to see justice turning against someone.

no...

District Attorneys don't indict someone unless they are pretty sure they have a case, and DA's are also pretty familiar with the "lethal force is an acceptable self-defense if your life is threatened" rule. There must be something going on here that we are not being told, either by the poster or by the media or by the police department. If the facts really are as the poster says, why would a DA jeopardize his career by bringing a case he can not win? I've seen many cases that seemed outrageous, only to find out that they were justified once you found out the real facts.

Nope... HE was allowed to be in that house... THEY were trespassers... The big problem comes if the one who died got out of the house and died elsewhere... Now, civilly, he COULD be sued for wrongful death, especially if the guy left, but I don't know that any jury in the world would convict him.

This Happened in Canada, beat the Goverment to death with letters, create an outcry that will send a message to those who represent all. It would be ruled self defence here in the U.S.. +5

ok in as far as the law is concerined it was in the line of self defense due to the men had guns and made the boy feel like his life was indanger therfore yes this is self defense now if the man who he shot had his back to him or the man that broke in was running away then no it is not self defense becasue the intruder no longer posed a threat to his life

No. Somewhere in my vicinity, two men broker into a man's home. They both had guns, but he shot and killed both of them. He wasn't charged because it was self-defense.

it depends on how it happened. Somehow I doubt manslaughter applies - as I understand it, that's for accidental killing. Possibly self defense, possibly first-degree murder. Need far more information to come to a conclusion

Just to let anyone who is interested know, the young man who had been charged with manslaughter has been released, and the charges dropped. It took almost a year to get done, but the public outcry was too great to ignore. It was a tragedy that a teen had to die that night, but he made a choice. The young man who shot him, with the assailant's own gun, and only after threats from a known fellow 'gangsta', was left with no choice. It was do or die, and his younger brothers had been threatened, not to mention himself. I was seriously worried that the goofy Canadian laws would not release him, but like I said, the public all but demanded it.

nope, shouldent be on the mans property

if the gun he used to shoot the man with was a legally owned and registered gun I see no reason why he would not have the right to defend himself in his own home and not be prosecuted for it.

check out the castle law, it pretty much states you have the right to deadly force if anyone unautherized enters your home or property without said permission.

No, of course not... under the law and the "castle doctrine" you are allowed to use deadly force being threatened in your own home. Also... the other 3 could face "felony murder" charges based on the fact that the death happened while they were in the commission of a felony - even though they did not directly cause it.

In the state of az your home is your castel and i believe it is like that in most states. If the four men broke into the house the man had a right to shoot him. law states as long as you didnt shoot him in the back then your ok. If you shoot him in the back it means he was no harm to you cause he was running away.I own a fire arm myself and if someone broke into my home someone would be planning his or her funeral.

No. a person has a right to protect himself and his family. This is justifable homocide.

Well of course not

kill them all just make sure they ar in the house before the police arrive