No Charges For Man Who Killed Burglars


Recommended Posts

Source: CBS news

A suburban Houston homeowner was cleared by a grand jury Monday for shooting to death two men he suspected of burglarizing his neighbor's home.

Joe Horn, 62, shot the two men in November after he saw them crawling out the windows of a neighbor's house in the Houston suburb of Pasadena, carrying bags of the neighbor's possessions.

Horn, a retired grandfather, called 911 and told the dispatcher he had a shotgun and was going to kill them. The dispatcher pleaded with him not to go outside, but Horn confronted the men with a 12-gauge shotgun and shot both in the back.

"The message we're trying to send today is the criminal justice system works," Harris County District Attorney Kenneth Magidson told reporters at the courthouse.

Horn's attorney, Tom Lambright, said his client was relieved by the grand jury's decision and never wanted to hurt anyone.

"He wasn't trying to take matters into his own hands," Lambright said. "He was scared. He was not playing cowboy."

Horn did not speak with reporters on Monday.

A large red sign with the words "No Trespass" on it blocked the path to his front door and a handwritten sign on the door said "Please no media" "No Trespassing" and "Do not knock or ring bell." A couple of neighbors also had signs on their doors asking media to leave them alone.

A few police cars patrolled the area near Horn's home.

Lambright reiterated to reporters that Horn believed the two men had broken into his neighbor's home and that he shot them out of fear for his life when they came into his yard and threatened him.

"He wasn't acting like a vigilante," Lambright said. "He was well within his rights to do what he was doing."

The two suspected burglars, Hernando Riascos Torres, 38, and Diego Ortiz, 30, were unemployed illegal immigrants from Colombia. Torres was deported to Colombia in 1999 after a 1994 cocaine-related conviction.

The incident touched off protests from civil rights activists who said the shooting was racially motivated and that Horn took the law into his own hands. Horn's supporters defended his actions, saying he was protecting himself and being a good neighbor to a homeowner who was out of town.

"I understand the concerns of some in the community regarding Mr. Horn's conduct," Magidson said. "The use of deadly force is carefully limited in Texas law to certain circumstances ... In this case, however, the grand jury concluded that Mr. Horn use of deadly force did not rise to a criminal offense."

The city of Pasadena, where protesters and defenders of Horn engaged in counter-demonstrations, pledged to keep its police force staffed enough to protect its citizens.

"The obvious lessons that can be drawn from (the Horn case) are that criminal activities are inherently a dangerous lifestyle, and the prevention and pursuit of those involved in criminal actions are best left to the police," said the statement issued by city spokeswoman Jennifer Banks.

Magidson said nine of the 12 grand jurors would have had to vote in favor of an indictment in order for Horn to be charged.

Grand jurors had to consider two issues: the intentional killing of another person and whether the killing was justified either by self defense or the defense of property, Magidson said.

Horn testified before the grand jury for about 1? hours last week, Lambright said.

Keith Hampton, a Houston attorney not connected with the case, said he didn't expect Horn to be indicted.

"This is a real conservative county," he said. "A lot of folks in Houston and Harris County are saying this man was doing a good thing."

In the 911 call, a dispatcher urges Horn to stay inside his house and not risk lives

"Don't go outside the house," the 911 operator pleaded. "You're gonna get yourself shot if you go outside that house with a gun. I don't care what you think."

"You wanna make a bet?" Horn answered. "I'm gonna kill 'em."

After the shooting, he redialed 911.

"I had no choice," he said, his voice shaking. "They came in the front yard with me, man. I had no choice. Get somebody over here quick."

Lambright said the 911 call gave the public the wrong impression about Horn and what happened that day.

"It's a very sad thing that occurred," Lambright said of the shootings.

Texas law allows people to use deadly force to protect themselves if it is reasonable to believe they are in mortal danger. In limited circumstances, people also can use deadly force to protect their neighbor's property; for example, if a homeowner asks a neighbor to watch over his property while he's out of town.

It's not clear whether the neighbor whose home was burglarized asked Horn to watch over his house.

Not being part of the jury, I don't have the full story here, but a few things just don't jive to me.

  • Horn, a retired grandfather, called 911 and told the dispatcher he had a shotgun and was going to kill them.
  • Horn's attorney, Tom Lambright, said his client was relieved by the grand jury's decision and never wanted to hurt anyone.

Sounds like he announced hisexact> intentions, which were recorded, to the dispatcher. Then he went out and did it.

  • but Horn confronted the men with a 12-gauge shotgun and shot both in the back.
  • and that he shot them out of fear for his life when they came into his yard and threatened him.

Somehow, it seems that the suspects were fleeing from him, not attacking and threatening.

Like I said, maybe the evidence in court told a different story. :ermm::

I only can hope my neighbors would do the same for my home and property...no, I don't think they would either but if people actually watched out for each other like this those who would seek to do harm would give it a lot more thought.

This is murder of the 1st degree, he had prior intention and commited the act...

It was commited outside his house with shots to the back.

Anyone actually has doubt if these were americans citizens and not illegal immigrants the results would be diffrent?

I think he was exaggerating when he said he was going to "kill them", personally, as is evidenced by his call back afterwords. He was just emphasizing that he could defend himself.

That said, I don't think we need to start killing people for burglary. I think he just felt threatened as it appears they approached him with what he viewed as a harmful intent when he went outside.

well, ppl can turn around pretty quick when confronted by a 12-gauge. sucks ppl died, but maybe it'll send a message to other idiots who want to be two bit no good thieves. think everyone should be issued a simple 6 shooter at birth, gun control classes in high school and ammo when they turn 18. everyone has a gun, crime goes down cause criminals know ppl are armed and are to chicken ****

Man, so much misinformation in this thread.

Here's the complete unabridged 911 call he made:

A few times he does say he is going to kill them. He also appears distraught afterward, and says they came on his property. The "artist" of this movie makes note how many times the 911 operator tells Joe not to go outside, but that doesn't make a bit of difference, not in the eyes of the law. If you've done something legal, it doesn't matter how many times someone has told you not to. And a 911 operator is not a legal authority, their word is not a lawful order.

On face value, the 911 call does seem to convict him. But I would be willing to place money that A) only one robber was shot in the back, probably after the first one was shot, and B) his lawyer was able to successfully show that he violated no laws in shooting people on his own property, especially people who had just committed a crime.

Remember, this is a grand jury. All this is, simply, is a hearing to determine whether or not there is enough evidence to even go to trial. The grand jury determined there was not enough evidence to even send this man to trial, so the evidence must have been pretty overwhelming that Joe did not commit a crime. Since there has been overwhelming evidence that he did not commit a crime, I would be willing to bet that Joe did indeed kill two criminals on his own property.

Hell yeah! Texas country baby! (Can you tell I live in Texas?) Ditto @ Cara; I hope my neighbors would do the same thing for me too.

Yeah , and I hope it's not your kid sneaking out of the house with his buddy or with his girlfriend, while you are sleeping.

Now that would be an interesting case....

Yeah , and I hope it's not your kid sneaking out of the house with his buddy or with his girlfriend, while you are sleeping.

Now that would be an interesting case....

Then wouldn't you be thankful...? JOKING!!!!

Yeah , and I hope it's not your kid sneaking out of the house with his buddy or with his girlfriend, while you are sleeping.

Now that would be an interesting case....

They would not be coming out of your neighbors house with sacks of stoeln items though would they?

Somehow, it seems that the suspects were fleeing from him, not attacking and threatening.

They were fleeing when he shot them, as you said. (If they were approaching a man with a shotgun and taunting him, the last thing they would do is turn away from him. That scenario makes no sense at all.) The article says Taxes law allows people to use deadly force when it's reasonable to believe they're in mortal danger. In this case the people were fleeing from the crime scene when they were shot, so it was unreasonable for him to believe he was in mortal danger, and therefore his actions were against the law.

Something like this happened in a town next to mine. Some guy was rifling through some truck in front of a house when the owner came out and confronted him, the guy proceeded to run down the street and was shoot in the back 3 times. I could see if he was in your house but damn.

In this case the people were fleeing from the crime scene when they were shot, so it was unreasonable for him to believe he was in mortal danger, and therefore his actions were against the law.

Not according to Mr. Horn, and the grand jury. According to the grand jury, there wasn't even enough evidence to support a claim that he broke the law. The grand jury is a hearing to determine if there's evidence to support the claim that he broke the law, not to determine if he's guilty or not. It's much more broad than that. In this case, there was not enough evidence to say he broke he broke any law. Even if you listen to his 911 tape, it seems pretty open and shut. Yet the grand jury still didn't indict him, so the other evidence must have been able to show, overwhelmingly, that what he did was not illegal.

I'm glad we have such astute lawyers on this forum.

Portion of news report from the Houston Chronicle:

Detective was on scene

Pasadena police have said a detective in plainclothes had parked in front of Horn's house in response to the 911 call, and saw the two men before they crossed into Horn's front yard.

Police believe that neither Horn nor the burglars knew an officer was present.

When Horn confronted the men in his yard, he raised his shotgun to his shoulder, police have said. However, the men ignored his order to freeze.

Authorities have said one man ran toward Horn but had angled away toward the street when he was shot in the back just before reaching the curb.

Ortiz and Torres died a short distance from Horn's house.

A news release from the city of Pasadena read, in part, "We hope that the decision of the grand jury, while difficult for some to accept, will be respected as the product of a careful weighing of all the facts by an impartial panel of citizens."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5864151.html

What I never heard from the media before this article was the fact that one of the suspects was running towards the homeowner when he shot. That fact right there changes a lot of things. Would I have shot? I sure would have.

Portion of news report from the Houston Chronicle:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5864151.html

What I never heard from the media before this article was the fact that one of the suspects was running towards the homeowner when he shot. That fact right there changes a lot of things. Would I have shot? I sure would have.

Just like I suspected. Good find, got to love how blindly people follow the media instead of doing some minor critical thinking...

They would not be coming out of your neighbors house with sacks of stoeln items though would they?

Let me rephrase it for you. So it's dark at night, low visibility. Your neighbour has a shotgun and he is watching someone coming out of your home's window. He goes out and shoots the suspect in the back, now if that suspect happens to be your kid sneaking out of the house at night, how would you react than?

Let me rephrase it for you. So it's dark at night, low visibility. Your neighbour has a shotgun and he is watching someone coming out of your home's window. He goes out and shoots the suspect in the back, now if that suspect happens to be your kid sneaking out of the house at night, how would you react than?

Except that's not even close to what happened in this case so your analogy is null.

-Spenser

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!