The homeowner who fatally shot a 20-year-old University of South Carolina student who tried to enter the wrong home on the street he lived on Saturday morning will not face charges because the incident was deemed “a justifiable homicide” under state law, Columbia police announced Wednesday.

Police said the identity of the homeowner who fired the gunshot that killed Nicholas Donofrio shortly before 2 a.m. Saturday will not be released because the police department and the Fifth Circuit Solicitor’s Office determined his actions were justified under the state’s controversial “castle doctrine” law, which holds that people can act in self-defense towards “intruders and attackers without fear of prosecution or civil action for acting in defense of themselves and others.”

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
-69 points

Kid accidentally enter wrong home this was Not Justified. Mother fuckers the law needs to be repealed and done over then.

Shooting someone just for entering or knocking on your door isn’t an excuse to shoot to kill someone. Should at least give person a warning.

I hope that homeowner never finds peace again and better be glad it wasn’t my kid.

permalink
report
reply
46 points

He didn’t just accidentally enter the wrong home, he was forcibly breaking into the home when he was shot. Even breaking a window to open the door from the inside.

Tragic as he was likely just intoxicated and confused, but understandable that the homeowner would use force to defend himself

While the woman was on the phone with police, Donofrio broke a glass window on the front door “and reached inside to manipulate the doorknob,” at which point the male resident fired the shot through the broken window that struck Donofrio in his upper body, according to police

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

Glad breaking and entering is now considered worth a death sentence.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

This wasn’t a punishment or sentence.

He was literally breaking through the door to enter the house.

What was the home owner supposed to do? Hope he became non-violent once he got in? Challenge him to a game of chess? Declare a set of non-lethal rules and duke it out?

The homeowner has a right to not be attacked in his own home ffs

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Keep moving the goalposts!

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points
*

You have to judge it from the perspective if the person living there. They hear someone banging on their door, trying to get into the house, breaking the window and forcing their way in. They had absolutely no reason to believe this was a simple misunderstanding, and every reason to believe their life was in danger.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Go read the article before you comment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

This wasn’t a kid knocking at the wrong door in the middile of the day.

This was a 2 AM and break in where the guy busted a window to get at the door handle. This is WAY MORE than just knocking or a misunderstanding. I would agree that mistakes or even simple burglary don’t deserve the death penalty, BUT… if he was aggressive enough to be smashing things in the middle of the night after banging on the door and windows, then what would he also be aggressive and mistaken about when he got inside? At a certain point being concerned for your own safety is legitmate and we crossed that line awhile ago.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

He mightve thought he was trying to enter his house. However breaking a window and reaching for the lock is a good way to get either shot or arrested for b&o even if he is drunk as a skunk.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Hey doofus did you even read the article? He was breaking into the home. Maybe read the fucking article before spouting bullshit, next time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Bro banged on the door and broke a window to try to get in. He was literally forcefully entering a locked house, he didn’t just wander into an unlocked door by mistake.

No telling what the kid was trying to do or would have done if he got in. Home owners have to assume the person trying to kick in the door and breaking a window is there to do harm. Justified self defense to anyone with two brain cells to rub together.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

By all accounts he thought he was entering his own home, thought he was breaking his own windows, etc. Seems to me like a little more dialog and this kid’s still alive and a broken window is the worst part of the event. With castle doctrine laws the way they are mistakes and misunderstandings are much more likely to become fatal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

Not being allowed to defend yourself until the intruder finishes breaking in to your home and attacks you simply means self-defense isn’t allowed, because at that point you’re probably already dead.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The homeowners were awake, and calling the cops. Sounds like the kid was drunk to the point he wasn’t engaging in conversation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Not by all accounts. Specifically not by the accounts of the people who were inside the home that was getting broken into at 2am.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 32K

    Posts

  • 759K

    Comments