Man with autism dies days after apparent home invasion....

Page 1 of 3 [ 34 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

13 Feb 2015, 9:26 pm

KSL.com wrote:
Police confirmed a 24-year-old man with autism, who was confronted by a homeowner after a reported home invasion, has died.

On Feb. 7, police were called to a home invasion on the 1300 block of Banbury Drive.

The homeowner, Jon Hislop, said he was in his home watching TV when he heard his front door rattling around 11 p.m. He looked out the peephole and saw that someone had covered it, figuring it was his brother-in-law playing a joke on him.

Hislop opened the door and the man entered, allegedly hitting Hislop on the head with a VHS tape.

Hislop put the man into a chokehold while his wife called the police. The man eventually fell into unconsciousness. Paramedics took him to an area hospital where he was placed into a medically induced coma.

Police said the man died on Feb. 12.

Family friend Jared Gull said the man has escaped from the home many times, and he needs 24-hour supervision. Gull claims the man became confused and tried to open a door at a nearby house.

Gull said the man was nonverbal, functioned at the level of a 2-year-old, and had a severe seizure disorder.

More information will be posted when it's available.

KSL.COM: "Man with autism dies days after apparent home invasion, Syracuse police say" (February 13, 2015)
http://www.ksl.com/?sid=33465623

Is it just me, or could the unnamed "24-year-old man with autism" have believed that it was his home that had been invaded? Utah has some of the most liberal "castle-doctrine" laws about self-defense during home invasions, but I suspect that the county attorney in that community will question the necessity of a chokehold of the man armed only with a VHS-tape cassette.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

14 Feb 2015, 8:33 am

Although tragic, I don't think Hislop acted inappropriately. The deceased was probably confused, although I don't know why he hit Hislop with the VHS tape.

Subduing someone who forces their way into your family's home is s normal response.



AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

14 Feb 2015, 10:33 am

androbot01 wrote:
Although tragic, I don't think Hislop acted inappropriately. The deceased was probably confused, although I don't know why he hit Hislop with the VHS tape.

Subduing someone who forces their way into your family's home is s normal response.

True, but in Utah, at least, proportionality is considered in cases of self defense during home invasions. It might be that the autistic young man had a seizure while restrained with a "chokehold" and died as a result of that seizure. But, even law-enforcement instructors admit and describe how using a "carotid control" restraint can cause death http://www.policemag.com/channel/patrol ... ntrol.aspx . And, under Utah law, killing the unarmed man despite his brief physical reaction to being in the wrong house is considered wrongful death or negligent homicide. Any mistaken entry into the house wouldn't mitigate his consequent death from having entered.

I suspect that the homeowner believed that he was acting appropriately with his use of a neck restraint. Clearly, his wife tried to revive the young man. The best intentions that they exhibited probably won't be enough to mitigate much of the fact that the young man died as a result of their actions.

A sad situation all around. I just wish that the homeowner hadn't gone too far.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

14 Feb 2015, 5:43 pm

what is a person to think if a stranger walks into ones house.its sucks what happened to the autistic guy but what was the home owner to do.he had no way of knowing the invader was no threat.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

14 Feb 2015, 6:00 pm

vermontsavant wrote:
what is a person to think if a stranger walks into ones house.its sucks what happened to the autistic guy but what was the home owner to do.he had no way of knowing the invader was no threat.

It shouldn't matter what the homeowner thinks if the homeowner's house is entered illegally. The homeowner can do whatever he or she chooses to do so long as what he or she does isn't illegal in itself. Using force under Utah law may be used only as the law allows:

Utah.gov wrote:
76-2-405. Force in defense of habitation.

(1) A person is justified in using force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other's unlawful entry into or attack upon his habitation; however, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury only if:

(a) the entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner, surreptitiously, or by stealth, and he reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person, dwelling, or being in the habitation and he reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence; or

(b) he reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony in the habitation and that the force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.

(2) The person using force or deadly force in defense of habitation is presumed for the purpose of both civil and criminal cases to have acted reasonably and had a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or serious bodily injury if the entry or attempted entry is unlawful and is made or attempted by use of force, or in a violent and tumultuous manner, or surreptitiously or by stealth, or for the purpose of committing a felony.

Amended by Chapter 252, 1985 General Session
http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_02_040500.htm

The conditions that the law requires to justify deadly force are currently in doubt in this case. I suspect that there will be an attempt by the county attorney to depose the homeowner, his wife, involved neighbors, responding law-enforcement officers and any emergency-medical technicians and medical examination staffers. Failing that, it appears that the homeowner might be charged with wrongful death if only to pursue a determination of what happened legally.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


alex
Developer
Developer

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,214
Location: Beverly Hills, CA

14 Feb 2015, 6:57 pm

A properly executed chokehold is an effective way to subdue someone. It's used in jiujitsu. In classes, students routinely practice doing this to each other.


_________________
I'm Alex Plank, the founder of Wrong Planet. Follow me (Alex Plank) on Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/alexplank.bsky.social


AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

14 Feb 2015, 7:10 pm

alex wrote:
A properly executed chokehold is an effective way to subdue someone. It's used in jiujitsu. In classes, students routinely practice doing this to each other.

Exactly, if it is properly executed. Because of this caveat, I suspect that either the county attorney (in the case of a criminal trial sought by the local government) or private lawyers (in the case of a civil trial sought by the young man's family) would want to determine what level of experience and training the homeowner had in properly executing his attempt of a chokehold.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


OliveOilMom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,447
Location: About 50 miles past the middle of nowhere

14 Feb 2015, 7:45 pm

Just because something has an unexpected deadly result doesn't make it defined as deadly force. Deadly force is usually seen as shooting, stabbing, or hitting in the head with a heavy object. A VCR tape doesn't fall into that category. A choke hold isn't usually considered deadly force.

The guy could have gotten a clot from the hold, he could have gotten a bleed from getting hit in the head, he could have had a reaction to the meds. The homeowner physically restrained him and that was within his rights. It doesn't matter whether the guy was autistic or knew what he was doing or not in this case. The only way that would matter is if they were decided whether or not to charge him with coming in. This case is about the homeowner and his intent and what he did. I think he was well within his rights and would have done the same or similar if somebody broke into my home like that.

Just because the guy had severe autism doesn't give him a free pass to do whatever he wants with no consequences. I wouldn't press charges against him for breaking in, probably, if he were alive, but I would certainly not just let him break in and do whatever he wanted to my home while waiting on the law. If nothing else, I would put him on the floor and sit on him and wait on the cops, even if I knew he was autistic. If he was already that agitated there would be a good chance of a meltdown and meltdowns can be violent. I've had some where I destroyed quite a few things in my own home. Nobody else is gonna come into my house and destroy my stuff. The homeowner was within his rights, as sad as the situation turned out to be.


_________________
I'm giving it another shot. We will see.
My forum is still there and everyone is welcome to come join as well. There is a private women only subforum there if anyone is interested. Also, there is no CAPTCHA. ;-)

The link to the forum is http://www.rightplanet.proboards.com


heavenlyabyss
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,393

14 Feb 2015, 10:20 pm

Amazing that anyone could say that the homeowner acted appropriately.

Yeah, so there's guy in my house. I'm going to put him in a chokehold!! !! !! ! This is by far the most smartest and logicalest move ever!

It's my right!! !! !



OliveOilMom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,447
Location: About 50 miles past the middle of nowhere

14 Feb 2015, 10:44 pm

heavenlyabyss wrote:
Amazing that anyone could say that the homeowner acted appropriately.

Yeah, so there's guy in my house. I'm going to put him in a chokehold!! ! ! ! ! ! This is by far the most smartest and logicalest move ever!

It's my right!! ! ! !


You're absolutely right! I don't know what I was thinking. People who come into my home that way should never, EVER be met with violence. I should remember that and offer them something to drink and a snack. Just because someone pushes their way into my home and hits me in the head with an object is absolutely no reason to react with violence.

That homeowner should be shot! He should have instinctively known or suspected that the guy had severe autism and been prepared for it. If he was any type of a decent person he would have asked the guy to have a seat, turned on My Little Pony, turned down the lights and sat politely while waiting for the guy to decide that he feels comfortable with going back home.

I don't know what I was thinking. A homeowner putting someone who pushed their way into his house in a chokehold! Next thing you know, people will start expecting others to not take their belongings! What kind of a world would that be?

What exactly do you suggest that the homeowner should have done Heavenly? I mean really, what options did he actually have? Do you suggest that he shouldn't restrain the guy who had hit him and pushed his into his home? Do you think that just because the guy is autistic that he should be able to go into other people's homes and do what he wants even when they didn't invite him? Do you think that the guy has no rights to his own home?

Chockholds are usually not lethal. They are also a valid way of restraining others. What do you think he should have done?


_________________
I'm giving it another shot. We will see.
My forum is still there and everyone is welcome to come join as well. There is a private women only subforum there if anyone is interested. Also, there is no CAPTCHA. ;-)

The link to the forum is http://www.rightplanet.proboards.com


League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,205
Location: Pacific Northwest

15 Feb 2015, 12:51 am

I call it a tragic situation. It was no one's fault. The man got attacked with a VHS tape so he did self defense and it looks like he unintentionally killed him. it doesn't matter what state of mind someone is in, if they get attacked, they have the right to defend themselves.


_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed.

Daughter: NT, no diagnoses.


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

15 Feb 2015, 4:39 am

AspieUtah wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
what is a person to think if a stranger walks into ones house.its sucks what happened to the autistic guy but what was the home owner to do.he had no way of knowing the invader was no threat.

It shouldn't matter what the homeowner thinks if the homeowner's house is entered illegally. The homeowner can do whatever he or she chooses to do so long as what he or she does isn't illegal in itself. Using force under Utah law may be used only as the law allows:

Utah.gov wrote:
76-2-405. Force in defense of habitation.

(1) A person is justified in using force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other's unlawful entry into or attack upon his habitation; however, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury only if:

(a) the entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner, surreptitiously, or by stealth, and he reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person, dwelling, or being in the habitation and he reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence; or

(b) he reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony in the habitation and that the force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.

(2) The person using force or deadly force in defense of habitation is presumed for the purpose of both civil and criminal cases to have acted reasonably and had a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or serious bodily injury if the entry or attempted entry is unlawful and is made or attempted by use of force, or in a violent and tumultuous manner, or surreptitiously or by stealth, or for the purpose of committing a felony.

Amended by Chapter 252, 1985 General Session
http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_02_040500.htm

The conditions that the law requires to justify deadly force are currently in doubt in this case. I suspect that there will be an attempt by the county attorney to depose the homeowner, his wife, involved neighbors, responding law-enforcement officers and any emergency-medical technicians and medical examination staffers. Failing that, it appears that the homeowner might be charged with wrongful death if only to pursue a determination of what happened legally.
but a wrestling move is not an attempt at using deadly force,very sadly the wrestling move caused enough stress to cause a siezure in a man with profund neurological difficulties but a sleeper hold is not a cause of death the home owner could have reasonably forseen


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


heavenlyabyss
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,393

15 Feb 2015, 8:38 am

OliveOilMom wrote:
heavenlyabyss wrote:
Amazing that anyone could say that the homeowner acted appropriately.

Yeah, so there's guy in my house. I'm going to put him in a chokehold!! ! ! ! ! ! This is by far the most smartest and logicalest move ever!

It's my right!! ! ! !


You're absolutely right! I don't know what I was thinking. People who come into my home that way should never, EVER be met with violence. I should remember that and offer them something to drink and a snack. Just because someone pushes their way into my home and hits me in the head with an object is absolutely no reason to react with violence.

That homeowner should be shot! He should have instinctively known or suspected that the guy had severe autism and been prepared for it. If he was any type of a decent person he would have asked the guy to have a seat, turned on My Little Pony, turned down the lights and sat politely while waiting for the guy to decide that he feels comfortable with going back home.

I don't know what I was thinking. A homeowner putting someone who pushed their way into his house in a chokehold! Next thing you know, people will start expecting others to not take their belongings! What kind of a world would that be?

What exactly do you suggest that the homeowner should have done Heavenly? I mean really, what options did he actually have? Do you suggest that he shouldn't restrain the guy who had hit him and pushed his into his home? Do you think that just because the guy is autistic that he should be able to go into other people's homes and do what he wants even when they didn't invite him? Do you think that the guy has no rights to his own home?

Chockholds are usually not lethal. They are also a valid way of restraining others. What do you think he should have done?


Lol, I totally understand where you are coming from.

But I mean if you really think about it I mean it's just a f*****g house. Why can't people come and go as they please. Why is a house a f*****g castle?????

Lol, I'm being facetious, I know this is not how real life works on average, but I mean come on. Society is pretty screwed up. That's all I'm saying.

Sometimes the entire world is wrong.



heavenlyabyss
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,393

15 Feb 2015, 8:43 am

I mean it's a house! Lol....

Seriously, this is very sad to me. Sometimes I just hate this world.

I understand why the homeowner acted the way he did. I'm not saying he's evil, I'm not saying I hate him.... I just think it's really really really weird that this sort of thing is commonplace.



AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

15 Feb 2015, 9:57 am

vermontsavant wrote:
but a wrestling move is not an attempt at using deadly force....

No it isn't, per se. But, when an individual misuses such a move in his self-defense, the mistaken effect(s) can change that truism whereby the move results in deadly force. That is why such deaths are legally described as "negligent" or "wrongful" as opposed to "willful" or "premeditated."

vermontsavant wrote:
...very sadly the wrestling move caused enough stress to cause a siezure in a man with profund neurological difficulties but a sleeper hold is not a cause of death the home owner could have reasonably forseen

That is why I described the idea of proportionality in every individual's self-defense actions. Without proper instruction, knowledge and experience about performing a chokehold, an individual's botched attempt can, unfortunately, earn him an arrest and criminal charges. Sure, his "fear for his safety and life from impending injury and maybe death" might mitigate much of the charges, but the experience getting the judge to agree with him might be costly and tedious.

Reacting to a stranger in you home without limits to your actions can be detrimental to your legal standing. As I intended by linking to the report and commentary about law-enforcement officers going too far with their attempts with this kind of wrestling move, even officers who are presumably trained to act professionally in these circumstances have too frequently botched their reactions. Is it too strange that the homeowner went too far, too?

We shall see. We still haven't heard what the young man's family plans to do in pursuing a civil complaint, regardless of any criminal charges.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

15 Feb 2015, 10:55 am

AspieUtah wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
but a wrestling move is not an attempt at using deadly force....

No it isn't, per se. But, when an individual misuses such a move in his self-defense, the mistaken effect(s) can change that truism whereby the move results in deadly force. That is why such deaths are legally described as "negligent" or "wrongful" as opposed to "willful" or "premeditated."

vermontsavant wrote:
...very sadly the wrestling move caused enough stress to cause a siezure in a man with profund neurological difficulties but a sleeper hold is not a cause of death the home owner could have reasonably forseen

That is why I described the idea of proportionality in every individual's self-defense actions. Without proper instruction, knowledge and experience about performing a chokehold, an individual's botched attempt can, unfortunately, earn him an arrest and criminal charges. Sure, his "fear for his safety and life from impending injury and maybe death" might mitigate much of the charges, but the experience getting the judge to agree with him might be costly and tedious.

Reacting to a stranger in you home without limits to your actions can be detrimental to your legal standing. As I intended by linking to the report and commentary about law-enforcement officers going too far with their attempts with this kind of wrestling move, even officers who are presumably trained to act professionally in these circumstances have too frequently botched their reactions. Is it too strange that the homeowner went too far, too?

We shall see. We still haven't heard what the young man's family plans to do in pursuing a civil complaint, regardless of any criminal charges.
OK,let me get this straight

the officially correct procedure if someone you do not know who enters your house uninvited,who for all you know may be there to rob,rape,kidnapp or murder you is:

let them have there way with you and do not resist; then, "if" your still alive when the intruder leaves call 911 and wait for the police to come


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined