# Man shoots intruder who was in his shower



## Steve (Apr 6, 2017)

1st-degree murder charge for man accused of shooting intruder in shower

Guy goes into his business, finds a dude in his shower.  He goes to his house, gets a gun, goes back and shoots the guy.


> Court documents say Fanning entered the business and saw Rosa in the shower. He said he saw a door kicked in and a screen removed, reports CBS affiliate KIRO. Fanning told detectives he was afraid and thought Rosa was drunk.
> 
> Detectives say instead of calling 911, Fanning went back to his home, got a handgun and then shot Rosa three times through a shower curtain. Fanning had initially been charged with second-degree murder, but the new upgraded charge indicates prosecutors aim to prove the killing was pre-meditated.


First degree murder.   Self defense?   I don't think so.  What say you?


----------



## jobo (Apr 6, 2017)

Steve said:


> 1st-degree murder charge for man accused of shooting intruder in shower
> 
> Guy goes into his business, finds a dude in his shower.  He goes to his house, gets a gun, goes back and shoots the guy.
> 
> First degree murder.   Self defense?   I don't think so.  What say you?


well I dont knowUSA law, but it would be murder in the uk


----------



## Steve (Apr 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> well I dont knowUSA law, but it would be murder in the uk


There's an idea here of castle doctrine.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 6, 2017)

Clearly not self defense, to my way of thinking. If you can leave, go get a gun, and come back, you clearly could have simply left and called the police. You also must have one hell of a hot water heater, for the shower to last that long.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Apr 6, 2017)

In Texas, you can shot any intruder who comes into your house. Not too sure about the business office. Many years ago, one of my neighbor's daughter was raped when both of her parents were tied on the chairs. When the intruders left, one intruder told the girl's parents, "You should get a dog, or get a gun."


----------



## JR 137 (Apr 6, 2017)

I call it murder, and I'm all for protecting my home/family.

Killing someone in self defense requires fear of being killed.  He was so afraid for his life that he left, got a gun, came back and shot through a shower curtain?  The only way I could KIND OF see that being justifiable is if the intruder had realistically threatened him before and he thought it was a trap, but that's really a stretch.

If the intruder is armed, justifiable.  If there's a reasonable chance the intruder is armed, and is coming at you, justifiable.  In your shower and doesn't know you're there?  Nope.  Leaving, getting a gun and coming back?  Nope.

He should have called 911 from a safe place and videotaped the intruder leaving if he left before the police arrived.

Now a few things just don't add up.  Maybe I'm missing something...

1. The intruder was in the shower long enough for him to leave and come back with a gun?  Was the gun/his home next door?

2. How did he know for certain it was an intruder?  Maybe his wife, kids, etc. got locked out and had to break in.  Then what?  Shoot his wife through a shower curtain?  All bets are off if he lived alone though, and it's reasonable to assume it's an intruder from the circumstances.  But still - make certain it's an actual intruder.

3. Did he peek into the shower, then leave?

4. Thought the intruder was drunk?  And someone being drunk makes him fear for his life?

5. So afraid for his life that he had time to leave, get a gun, come back, and shoot before the intruder had any clue he was there?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 6, 2017)

Steve said:


> 1st-degree murder charge for man accused of shooting intruder in shower
> 
> Guy goes into his business, finds a dude in his shower.  He goes to his house, gets a gun, goes back and shoots the guy.
> 
> First degree murder.   Self defense?   I don't think so.  What say you?


For the U.S. it's difficult to say as I've seen some crazy crap pass as self-defense.   If the guy finds the guy in the shower, goes home, the guy is still there, the guy "attack" or "approaches in a dangerous manner" then it's possible that the jury will say it was out of self-defense.   

The only hurdle that they have to get over is "Why didn't he call the police?"  If he was able to easily go home to get a gun the he should have made a call to the police first and wait for the police to arrive.

For me, it's an easy case of murder. However, for the jury that will pass a guilty or innocent statements, I have no idea of how that will turn out these days.


----------



## Headhunter (Apr 7, 2017)

Steve said:


> 1st-degree murder charge for man accused of shooting intruder in shower
> 
> Guy goes into his business, finds a dude in his shower.  He goes to his house, gets a gun, goes back and shoots the guy.
> 
> First degree murder.   Self defense?   I don't think so.  What say you?


That story is very fishy....firstly why was a guy who broke in in the shower and not you know robbing the place and the guy left so why come back and by the sounds of it was in no danger


----------



## JR 137 (Apr 7, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> For the U.S. it's difficult to say as I've seen some crazy crap pass as self-defense.   If the guy finds the guy in the shower, goes home, the guy is still there, the guy "attack" or "approaches in a dangerous manner" then it's possible that the jury will say it was out of self-defense.
> 
> The only hurdle that they have to get over is "Why didn't he call the police?"  If he was able to easily go home to get a gun the he should have made a call to the police first and wait for the police to arrive.
> 
> For me, it's an easy case of murder. However, for the jury that will pass a guilty or innocent statements, I have no idea of how that will turn out these days.



The problem with us passing judgement on any case is we only hear a very condensed version through the highly informative and truly unbiased media (insert sarcastic tone of voice and facial expressions here).

Take the McDonald's infamous coffee spill/burn case...

We were told a woman sued for and was awarded millions because a woman spilled coffee on her lap.  It was all her fault; she was just money hungry and didn't want to work for it.

We studied this case in my sport law class (as an example of how the truth gets twisted).  Truth is McDonald's had internal memos from their own lawyers demanding they serve coffee at a lower temperature because it was way too hot and someone's going to get burned severely.  The woman had 2nd and 3rd degree burns to about 25% of her body, including her genetalia.  She required about 5 skin graft surgeries and 6 months of physical therapy.  She sued for half of her medical bills and lost wages, because she felt she was halfway responsible.

The jury is the one who recommended the multimillion dollar amount in damages.  How did they come up with the number?  2 days worth of coffee sales in US McDonald's.

An appellate judge reversed the damages, and awarded something like $50,000 in damages in addition to all medical expenses and lost wages (don't hold me to the damages amount; it was something like that).

McDonald's PR team made McDonald's look like the victim.

Then again, that's just another side of the story.  I'm sure there's even more to it that'll change opinions.


----------



## Buka (Apr 7, 2017)

Oh, heck, I dunno'.

Not speaking as a cop here, just as one of us guys. (It's kinda' nice being one of us guys)

You're in _my_ house, in _my_ shower? Just get in the shower with the guy and teach him the error of his ways. I mean, how could you resist that? Seriously, how?


----------



## Danny T (Apr 7, 2017)

According to the news video linked in the article Fanning (the owner of the property) stated he confronted Rosa verbally. He then left the building going to his home on the same property to get his gun, returned and shot Rosa 3 times through the shower curtain.
He also had a sign posted "Trespassers Will Be Shot"
Murder.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 7, 2017)

Washington does not require retreat but also doesn't have a written castle doctrine either.

But this case doesn't look to meet the standards of protecting life or property so can't see anyway it would be justified.


Gut feeling is that there is more to the story...shooter probably had problems with victim prior and just saw an opportunity.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Apr 7, 2017)

Based on what we know it does not look like self-defense!


----------



## hoshin1600 (Apr 7, 2017)

Steve said:


> There's an idea here of castle doctrine.


i thought someone of more experience in this area would chime in but ...
it doesnt apply in this case.  doesnt matter how you spin this one, its not self defense.  there are some legal requirments for self defense and this is pretty cut and dry not it.


----------



## Steve (Apr 7, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> i thought someone of more experience in this area would chime in but ...
> it doesnt apply in this case.  doesnt matter how you spin this one, its not self defense.  there are some legal requirments for self defense and this is pretty cut and dry not it.


I'd be interested to learn more about this.  I don't know much.  My impression has been that it's a sort of blanket policy.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 7, 2017)

Steve said:


> I'd be interested to learn more about this.  I don't know much.  My impression has been that it's a sort of blanket policy.



Washington state allows you to protect yourself and does not require you to retreat from anywhere you are legally allowed to be.

They do not have a written stand your ground law.  But court precedents have ruled that you do not have to retreat if possible.


----------



## JP3 (Apr 8, 2017)

'





Steve said:


> First degree murder.   Self defense?   I don't think so.  What say you?



Straight-up, pre-meditated, 1st degree murder. Guy in your business, he's inside, you are really not and you can leave as evidenced by... his leaving.  Rather than using the authorities to handle the problem, he ups the ante, goes and gets handgun, and then shoots from what I presume is a concealed position since he stayed on his side of the shower curtain.  If the facts are accurate as stated, this guy goes down for the charge as stated.


----------



## Buka (Apr 8, 2017)

JP3 said:


> '
> 
> Straight-up, pre-meditated, 1st degree murder. Guy in your business, he's inside, you are really not and you can leave as evidenced by... his leaving.  Rather than using the authorities to handle the problem, he ups the ante, goes and gets handgun, and then shoots from what I presume is a concealed position since he stayed on his side of the shower curtain.  If the facts are accurate as stated, this guy goes down for the charge as stated.



I agree completely....which is why you should shed your clothes, get in the shower and put an end to his foolish day.....then lie to the authorities. I don't believe in lying to the authorities, but make an exception in this case.

To a lot of us old fashioned people, your home is more than just the place you live.


----------



## JP3 (Apr 8, 2017)

Whoa.... you're way more confortable with that shower scene than me...


----------



## Steve (Apr 8, 2017)

Buka.  You're a crazy mother trucker.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Apr 8, 2017)

We really don't know the entire story.  I mean the guy was in the shower he wasn't robbing the place and he wasn't trashing he place., if the business was on the same property as the home...I mean maybe the dude just had fun with the wife and he needed a shower. Maybe he was a homeless guy with mental issues and didn't know where he was.
I came home one day from work and there was a dude sleeping on my couch. He was drunk and thought he was somewhere else. I escorted him out the door and sent him on his way. I didn't shoot the guy.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 8, 2017)

A friend of mines son-in-law plays in a band.

  One night after playing a bar he go totally wasted.  Someone gave him a ride home but in his drunken stupor he went to the house across the street from his.

While trying to unlock the front door, the home owner yelled at him (didn't recognise him and just thought he was a prowler) through the door to get lost.

Hearing a guys voice in what he thought was his home...he thought his wife was cheating on him.

He staggered to the back door and kicked it in to confront them at which time the homeowner shot him in the chest with a .357 magnum.

No charges on the homeowner.

Son-in-law lived at the disappointment of my friend.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 9, 2017)

CB Jones said:


> A friend of mines son-in-law plays in a band.
> 
> One night after playing a bar he go totally wasted.  Someone gave him a ride home but in his drunken stupor he went to the house across the street from his.
> 
> ...


Not disliking the story, disliking the line "Son-in-law lived at the disappointment of my friend."

Being disappointed that a drunk guy lived after being shot at for being drunk is never okay, even as a joke.


----------



## geezer (Apr 14, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> Not disliking the story, disliking the line "Son-in-law lived at the disappointment of my friend."
> 
> Being disappointed that a drunk guy lived after being shot at for being drunk is never okay, even as a joke.



I can accept it _as a joke_. Especially since this may have been just one example of this guy's asinine behavior.  Anyway, jokes and humor in general often involve situations that would not be funny at all if they really happened. So, I'm sincerely glad that the guy lived, ...in part for the homeowner who shot the guy. No sane person would want that on their conscience, even if it seemed justifiable in the moment.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 14, 2017)

geezer said:


> I can accept it _as a joke_. Especially since this may have been just one example of this guy's asinine behavior.  Anyway, jokes and humor in general often involve situations that would not be funny at all if they really happened. So, I'm sincerely glad that the guy lived, ...in part for the homeowner who shot the guy. No sane person would want that on their conscience, even if it seemed justifiable in the moment.



I like to call it "Stray Dog Luck."

My theory:

A worthless, mangy Stray Dog can spend 90% of his life on the highway and never get run over...and even when he gets hit...he survives.

But the first time that Pedigreed (insert expensive breed) touches the pavement he is toast.

That is Stray Dog Luck.


----------



## Jenna (Apr 14, 2017)

CB Jones said:


> I like to call it "Stray Dog Luck."
> 
> My theory:
> 
> ...


Plausible theory.. the logic being that stray dog have practice multiple mongrel arts to make them totally street.. #pedigreehate


----------



## lklawson (May 2, 2017)

In case any are curious, the U.S. firearms community has generally disavowed this person.  Every one in "the gun lobby" I've seen (including me) has concluded that this was not a case of self defense.  Murder.  He did not satisfy the 4 Pillars of Justifiable Deadly Force.

That said, his general response is actually not uncommon for people in general.  He gave a command.  He believed to his bones that his right to give the command was unquestionable.  When the command was ignored, he used force, lethal force in this case, to enforce his command.
When the Criminal Doesn’t Obey your Commands | Buckeye Firearms Association

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## eddiecharette (May 8, 2017)

I would say self defense


----------



## KenpoDave (May 9, 2017)

Guess it was a "clean shot."


----------

