The two burglars that Joe Horn murdered were here in the U.S. illegally

[Catherine Vincent]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5359290.html

Dec. 7, 2007, 1:23AM
2 SHOT IN PASADENA HERE ILLEGALLY
1 man had been deported in '99; officials looking at possible ties to a burglary ring

By ROBERT CROWE
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle


Pasadena protests collide Two burglary suspects shot by a Pasadena homeowner last month were illegal immigrants from Colombia, and one man had been deported nearly 10 years ago, authorities said Thursday.

Authorities also said they are investigating whether Diego Ortiz, 30, and Hernando Riascos Torres, 48, were part of a crime ring linked to burglaries and the use of fake immigration documents.

The two — killed by a Pasadena man Nov. 14 after he said they were trying to steal his neighbor's property — were in the country illegally, according to Leticia Zamarripa, a spokeswoman for the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Joe Horn, 61, shot Ortiz and Torres, who went by the alias Miguel Antonio DeJesus. Horn called police after hearing breaking glass. He ignored an operator's warning to not go outside with his gun.

Pasadena Police Department Capt. A.H. "Bud" Corbett said Torres was deported to Colombia in 1999 after a 1994 cocaine-related conviction. He was on parole until 2017, Corbett said. Police found a Puerto Rican identification card on Ortiz. He had two aliases. Torres had identification cards from Colombia, Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic. He had three aliases.

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

Sorry it still doesn't make right what Horn did.

[aquart]

1. You're right. Horn wasn't.

[Richard Steele]

2. Wait...wait...wait...

OK, go. :popcorn:

[blondeatlast]

13. May I? Thanks. nt

[flvegan]

3. This has

the makings of a classic.

:popcorn:

[AngryAmish]

11. Keep my spot warm

I gotta run to the bank.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

4. clearly that allows us to treat them like blackwater treats iraqis.

paint targets on their backs because they are here without immigration status.

[Buzz Clik]

5. He didn't shoot them because they were illegal immigrants.

He shot them because they were burglars.

This discussion is likely as not to explode momentarily; let's at avoid hyperbole.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

22. precisely my point. their immigration status is a red herring

to some extent, so is their criminal intent for a B&E. The idea that we are becoming the Wild West, able to shoot anyone for any reason should be extremely worrisome.

[Buzz Clik]

27. Ah. So we agree.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

46. we doth, we doth.

I have mixed feelings about fire arms. I have a gun, but I also have no kids, nor can anyone get easy access to it, but me. The only reason I got the license and the gun was because of threats from an ex-client from whom I withdrew my representation. They were serious enough that even a local cop suggested it.

I've taken safety classes. I've gotten to where I can hit what I aim at. almost (handguns are notoriously hard to aim. sharpshooters always use rifles, and never on semi or auto). Frankly, my values and ideas were truly complicated, and remain so about gun ownership. Now that I have it, I suspect that I will keep it. although I should clean it and get back into practice to keep the skill level up.

Could I shoot someone? Absolutely. I would have no mental inability to pull the trigger, given the right circumstances. (Those would have to be extremely dire, EXTREMELY dire) Would I take joy in loading a gun, telling 911 that I' gonna bag me a body? noeffinway. I suspect my nachtmares about having killed someone would stay with me forever. Self inflicted PTSD, in a way.

[blogslut]

53. He shot them because he could

He shot them because he felt he had that right.

The question is: Does he have that right?

[shadowknows69]

95. I think he shot them because he wanted to

I heard the 911 tapes. This was premeditated murder.

[Arkansas Granny]

6. You're right. Their immigration status does not change the fact

that Mr. Horn committed murder.

[liberalnurse]

36. Murder hasn't occured

as there are no charges. He, Horn was defending himself. That's legal.

[Arkansas Granny]

59. OK, no murder charges have been filed. However, if you listen

to the tape of the phone call to 911, Mr. Horn deliberately stepped outside his house and shot two men who were not threatening him. The reports I have read have not made it clear if they were on his property or still on his neighbors property, but he shot and killed two men while he was defending his neighbors property, not himself.

[liberalnurse]

80. I heard the audio too.

My impression is Horn had fear in his voice; he is elderly and was terrified he'd be next! A victim himself as a member of a community, a nation being assaulted by criminals without mercy. That's what I sensed and understand. No charges only validate my assessment.

[SharkSquid]

39. He has not been charged with murder

If he was defending himself he was defending himself.


If he was not he comitted murder.


The courts will decide.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

7. Zero beiring on the case...

[Deja Q]

76. Agreed; 2 disparate crimes...

But if they weren't here illegally, the other crime may not have happened either.

[Tarc]

8. Doesn't make it wrong, either.

They were robbing his neighbor's house, he went out with a gun, they approached him on his property. *bang* *bang*

Its a tragedy whenever there is a loss of life, but when you're breaking into other people's homes, I tend to lose a bit of sympathy.

[dysfunctional press]

12. exactly- they knew the "occupational hazards"

especially in texas.

[Common Sense Party]

19. "You mess with the bull you get the horns"

and all that.

I'm still not convinced he couldn't have safely detained the burgling scumbags with a warning shot and a command to get on the ground. He'd already been told Police were en route.

[michreject]

31. He would have went to jail

I'm still not convinced he couldn't have safely detained the burgling scumbags with a warning shot

Illegally discharging a weapon.

I'm not overlooking any thing in this reply.

[SharkSquid]

40. Warning shots are illegal

You shoot, you shoot to kill.

Thats the point of SD.

[Kingshakabobo]

9. If he had know that, I'm sure he woulda gut-shot 'em and let them die reeeal slow like.

[SharkSquid]

41. Your hatred for southerners is pretty transparent

Thanks for that.

[Kingshakabobo]

57. LOL.

[KitchenWitch]

10. Is there room on that bench for me

:popcorn:

Can't help it, I am a Looky Lou.

[Dr. Strange]

21. Get back in the Lounge!

And don't get popcorn butter on the new drapes!

[OwnedByFerrets]

14. Joe Horn = Murderer

[ChairmanAgnostic]

47. yes.

[tularetom]

15. That they were illegal immigrants doesn't exempt them from scumbagism

They were scumbags and who gives a shit that they got shot. Joe Horn is also a scumbag and he is likely to pay a heavy price for his stupidity.

Ergo Mr Horn's ignorance is likely to have a double benefit for society - 2 creeps gone forever and another out of commission for a long time (maybe forever considering Horn's age).

[blondeatlast]

16. Agreed, catgirl. He's a murderer. nt

[shain from kane]

17. Oh, great! Now we'll have to pay to return them to Colombia in pine boxes. Don't want each

of them to steal six feet of our precious earth.

[slackmaster]

18. That smells pretty good, dicksteele

:popcorn:

[AlCzervik]

20. gotta go to Costco to get the pallet of popcorn.

yumm-o.

[Freddie Stubbs]

23. They came here to steal what American theives won't steal

[michreject]

35. I like that

:)

[zbdent]

24. no matter what their status ...

does robbing someone's home warrant the death penalty? And by one guy who was itchin' to shoot something?

[slackmaster]

42. Of course you are technically correct

But their immigration status isn't going to do the state much good in the eyes of a jury if it decides to prosecute Horn for something.

[GA_ArmyVet]

81. YES,

Burglary is "Illegal entry into a residence during the hours of darkness with the intent to commit another felony" is a more severe felony than simple housebreaking or theft, since the likelihood of violence increases due to the likelihood of persons being in the home being burgled. In some states it is a capital offense in others it is a mitigating circumstance if a death occurs during the felony. I have little sympathy for anyone who simply takes from others via force for their own selfish reasons and see no reason why we as citizens should have cower in fear or hide while waiting for the undermanned police to respond.

[opiate69]

82. So then...

since this incident did not happen "during the hours of darkness", they were, ostensibly, commiting the lesser crime of housebreaking, right?

[GA_ArmyVet]

85. Perhaps so,

I was not aware of the time frame, but I was under the impression it was night since the term burglary was used. It really depends on the wording of the state laws but that is how burglary is defined in most states and by the Federal Govt.

[zbdent]

83. but this was not his home, he was not threatened, and he was on the phone

with the police telling them what he was going to do to them. Sounds like premeditated to me ... and it sounds like he shot to kill, not to wound ...

I'm sorry, I can't agree with you on that one ...

[GA_ArmyVet]

86. thats ok, that what makes this world a grand place

we don't have to agree, as long as we can discuss things in a civil manner. I understood they came on his property. I could be wrong but I work a lot of hours and I don't get to follow things as closely as I would like.

My understanding was he called the police, was advises to stay inside, but went out anyway (no law broken,) carrying his weapon (also no law broken) and there was a confrontation on his property with two people that he had just witnessed committing a felony. And those two felons were shot in the resulting confrontation. The guy broke no laws going outside, and I see no reason why he should have to sit in house in fear simply to avoid two criminals so that they can make a safe departure. If they did not want to get shot then should not break into houses. Occupational hazard of housebreaking is getting shot by people who don't like you stealing their or in this case their neighbors stuff...sounds like a good neighborhood watch program to me.

[Richard Steele]

89. Are you aware that he shot them both in the back?

If not, does that now change your opinion of how "OK" this was?

Link:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5359290.html

[Horse with no Name]

93. You got it wrong Sparky

They were on his neighbors property and how did he KNOW that his neighbor didn't set up a burglary to collect insurance money?
He had absolutely no right to intervene further since he had already called the police.

[SharkSquid]

96. He claims they were on his property

10 ft from his door. But whatever.

He shot them in the back, thats pretty incriminating.

[Horse with no Name]

97. Yet when he called the police

He told THEM they were on his neighbors property.

[SharkSquid]

100. Yes but he was on the phone with the cops for a while

And they had left the neighbors house when he left. Maybe they decided the wanted a go at him too. Horn looked like he had a nice house too. The police and the DA will make the decision on whether or not he broke the law, all you have are a bunch of news reports.

[Horse with no Name]

101. Horn is a cold-blooded murderer

He should have stayed in his house until the police got there.
They were on their way.

[SharkSquid]

102. You can think what you like

The good thing is that you are not on his Jury or the Grand Jury, the problem is, you may be on someone elses, and that scares the shit out of me.

[Horse with no Name]

104. Even scarier

is that you might be.

He was told to stay in the house.
He was armed.
The police were on their way.


Going outside was foolish, suicidal or homicidal.

Take your pick--or pick all 3.

[SharkSquid]

106. Why is it scary for me to be on a Jury

People are INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY, clearly this is a hard concept for you to grasp.

He was told to stay in the house: Well goodie for him, this would have VERY little bearing in an actual court situation. It could go to show intent, however with the issue at hand, he was under know obligation to stay in the house if he felt that they were on their way to rob his house. 911 operators have about as much authority as I do over my wife, they can make suggestions, but you are free to perform against their advice if you feel it is in your best interest.

He was armed: I would be to if a bunch of folks were robbing the house next door.

The police were on their way: How many people died or became hostages while the "police were on their way". I would venture that there were a few.


I pick number one, foolish.

Once again, this is why there is a justice system, if these guys were robbing the place next door and he saw them and feared for his life in any way, he was entitled to self defense. If the cop saw him shoot them in the back, and there were conflicting accounts, than it will come out in trial and the JURY will decide using the actual evidence in the case, not a 911 tape and whatever eyewitness account the media wants us to see. The press will print whatever crap will get them circulation. The justice system will decide whether Joe Horn shot those men in the back, not the press, not me, not you.


Addendum since I seem to have to repeat this in every post, I do NOT support vigilante justice. This kind of crap on these boards is the behavior that taints jury pools and makes justice impossible in any high profile case.

Nancy Grace, is that you behind that avatar?

[DeaconBlues]

25. But, but, but, according to DUers all illegal immigrants are saintly folk

who are here to work hard at the jobs lazy Americans won't do. This story can't be true!

[Catherine Vincent]

29. You know that is not what DUers are saying.

Of course there may be some illegal immigrants that are not honest but then so are legals. It still does not excuse what Joe Horn did.

[DeaconBlues]

32. Its not? Ever read any of the illegal immigration threads here?

According to many here, those individuals in the States illegally are all just honest joes who are here to work, and who made the tiny, totally justified mistake of living in a foreign nation without paperwork.

As for what Joe Horn did, maybe Colombia should prosecute, since it was that nation's citizens that were here blatently commiting crimes. Good luck with extradition!

[SharkSquid]

43. I doubt Columbia gives a shit

Neither does Cuba or Mexico who are more than happy to send their shitbags over here with the rest.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

55. Cuba doesn't want Cubans coming here. The US practically INVITES Cubans here.

What with the dry foot policy. But I guess they're all the same right? :eyes:

[SharkSquid]

68. Mariel Boatlift in 1980

800-900 cubans were from Castros prisons. He allowed anyone who wanted to leave to leave from Mariel this included any prisoner not there for political reasons.

BTW I wont roll my eyes despite the temptation to do so.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

69. First of all, that was 27 years ago.

As a way to get back at the United States for encouraging defections. Second of all, you don't see any difference between that and what is happening with Mexico and Columbia?

[SharkSquid]

70. I see Mexico as more than happy to let its people come over

Do you think the Mexican govt gives a shit about those people dying in the desert?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

73. What Cuba did was a political move.

The mexican immigration movement is not.

[SharkSquid]

75. But the complicity of the governments is indeed the same n/t

[treestar]

52. It's not just "paperwork"

It is very difficult to get an immigrant visa for an employee. They have to be at professional level, with the exception of a very limited number of seasonal or temporary workers.

The laws need to fit the migration pattern better. There is always migration. The US isn't the only place to get immigrants. To get immigrants means the economy is larger, that's all.

So I bet you're not in favor of expanding the laws to allow the undocumented immigrants to have a legal way to come in.

In fact, most of them are just here to work, and in substandard conditions at that - that's the reason they are left with no immigration category to use to be legal in. If they were let in legally, they couldn't be paid below minimum wage. They are pretty much being exploited - US citizens who would work the same types of jobs should make common cause with them instead of letting big business use the divide and conquer strategy.

[treestar]

50. Some are, some aren't

Like any other large group of people, there are good and bad and in between.

[DeaconBlues]

88. But we are starting with a group of people whose first act in the country is

to break the law. And experience tells me that anyone from a group who has an ethical code that allows them to break one law is more likely to break another.

Its too bad these scumbags were shot. They should have been deported first, along with everyone else who is in this country illegally.

[treestar]

110. I don't agree with that

To break the immigration law or the traffic law or the tax law doesn't mean you'll end up a burglar.

Some break the immigration law out of desperation.

Some broke the Jim Crow laws. By your analysis, that would have been bad.

[alcibiades_mystery]

26. We should make these illegals wear yellow stars or something

So we can identify them, ya know?

:sarcasm:

[SharkSquid]

44. What a BS strawman

I am effing tired of that comparison, Jews in Europe were in their communities legally, they broke no laws merely by living in their communities. The laws against them living were written later.

[provis99]

77. you're wrong. According to the Nazis,

Jews WERE in the country illegally. They were breaking laws by existing in Germany, according to Nazi laws.

[SharkSquid]

79. These laws were written after the fact

The laws these people are breaking were written before they came here. They knowingly broke them and are aided both by their own governments and complicit governement and business here in the US.

[KamaAina]

28. So Horn checked their status with his Binford 6100 Immigration Meter

then blew them away in cold blood?!

:sarcasm:

[judaspriestess]

30. oh well two more Mexicans gone

this should make it all ok now. :sarcasm: (just in case)

on edit: yes I am aware they are Colombian but since all Latinos are illegal and Mexican......

[SharkSquid]

45. No Mexico just aids and abets them. n/t

[Romulox]

33. Immigration status has ZERO to do with whether this was self-defense or not

This seems more like an attempt to muddy the water than to clear it.

[I work for workers]

34. Point of contention: Murder implies the killings were unlawful.

I may be wrong, but the courts have yet to decide whether that is the case in these killings.

[Lance_Boyle]

37. No matter.

It was the burglary in progress that got them shot, not their immigration status. This is unimportant to the Joe Horn case (that has yet to make it to any court of law).

I wonder, though, about the families of the dead burglars who were protesting last week. Are they here legally? Seems like ICE ought to be looking into that, while the Texas justice system decides about Joe Horn.

[SharkSquid]

38. Wooooooo stir the pot! n/t

[treestar]

48. You're right

And besides, immigration status has nothing to do with it - US citizens do things like this. And illegal immigrants sometimes do helpful or heroic things.

But you can bet Lou Dobbs and the MSM will use it to cast aspersions on all immigrants, legal and illegal.

[madinmaryland]

49. Betcha Lou Dobbs will be all over this story!

[Disturbed]

54. Has it been determined if Horn shot one of these men

in the back?

[madinmaryland]

56. Does it matter?

Dobbs will hear "illegal immegrant" and will blather on about it incessantly.

[SharkSquid]

71. Makes all the difference

That is the only conclusive way to prove he did not shoot in self defense.

[Catherine Vincent]

87. He shot them both in the back.

See this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2427616

[dogday]

94. According to Channel 13, he shot one in the back and

one in this side... This just confirmed this am...

[ulysses]

51. oh! well, that changes

exactly nothing.

[Disturbed]

58. "Does it matter? If either of these men were shot in the back

it sure matters a great deal. Horn claims self defense. If he shot one or both of these men in
the back, then it is murder.

[ulysses]

60. I meant their immigration status.

[leaninglib]

61. This is a disturbing incident; however, a jury would never convict Horn,

so there's no need to go there.

Besides, he may well have saved some future victim's life. And while I am not sure about Horn, these two were surely nothing more than the lowest of the low.

[Catherine Vincent]

62. Your post is disgusting! nt

[Bluebear]

67. 'he may well have saved some future victim's life' - oh good, preemptive killing.

:silly:

[marmar]

72. That's what I was thinking.....

Jee-zus. I wanted to check the URL and make sure it didn't read http://www.freerepublic.com

:scared:

[Pavulon]

63. It is a bad idea to call a person a murderer

before they have been convicted of a crime. Even on the internet it exposes you to liability. If I call you, by name a rapist, or child molester, you have legal grounds to sue me.

FYI.

[alarimer]

64. What he did was murder, regardless of whether the DA is too chickenshit to prosecute

I wouldn't buy or rent a home near that guy. If I found out he lived in my neighborhood, I would move. Joe Horn is a piece of shit vigilante asshole and other asshole macho jackasses are cheering him on. Fuck Joe Horn and his defenders.

[Pavulon]

65. If I name you by your real name

and use rapist, murderer, or wife beater you can sue me. FYI.

Until he has been convicted what you are doing is pretty ignorant.

[SharkSquid]

74. Sorry forgot about that whole due process thing

damn.

[provis99]

78. Fine. I'll call him a vigilante, then.

Whether or not people want to get into the details of whether or not Horn was a murderer, he was definitely a vigilante. He admits as much in his own 911 call.

[Tejas]

84. then you're calling any LEO that shoots a burglar a murderer

In case your vigilantic mind conveniently forgot,
that's what due process (ie; investigation, trials and evidence) is for.

Oh yeah, and there's that silly thing called a conviction.

[Richard Steele]

90. Hey, I'll call anyone who shoots unarmed people in the back a murderer.

That's what he did- with premeditation. He's a murderer.

[SharkSquid]

99. One in the back one in the side

could have changed their mind about the attack halfway through. Courts and DA will decide.

[SharkSquid]

98. The only reason that is acceptable to shoot someone

Is self defense and the defense of others, you shoot someone you must be prepared to face the consequenses if your assesment of the situation was wrong.

[Occam Bandage]

66. It doesn't change the case at all, either way.

[rucky]

91. Great. More fodder for the zenophobes. n/t

[douglas9]

92. Pasadena police say Horn shot 2 men in the back (Update 12.8.07)

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5362232.html

[matcom]

103. Horn shot two HUMANS

that is all they were

[yellingman]

105. Horn murdered two men providing for their families

Lock him up and throw away the key. What kind of a evil hearted repub do you have to be to support him!

[SharkSquid]

108. Providing for their families

Maybe he could have sold that bling in his ear to provide a weeks worth of food for his family (if you havent seen the picture of one of the suspects with his kids, that is what I am referring to)

[Marie26]

107. So what? nt

[kurth]

109. They should have been arrested, put in jail, and deported