Houstonist vs. Houstonist: Joe Horn

Unless you've just returned from a sabbatical taken underneath a rock, you'll have heard the news that Joe Horn, the Pasadena man who shot and killed two men who were robbing his neighbor's house, was cleared of any crimes by a grand jury yesterday. The decision came after seven months of private deliberation and public debate over a case that could have serious repercussions and set legal precedents for years to come.

The facts are straightforward: On November 14, 2007, Joe Horn, a 61-year-old Pasadena resident, noticed that his neighbor's house was being broken into by two men. He called 9-1-1 and informed the dispatcher of the robbery in progress. He told the dispatcher, "I'm not going to let them get away with it." Shortly after, he said, "I'm gonna shoot. I'm gonna shoot." At some point thereafter, Horn took his shotgun and confronted the two men, despite the dispatcher's repeated requests that he not interfere in the situation as police were on their way.

On the 9-1-1 tapes, Horn could be heard yelling, "Move and you're dead." Very shortly after that, three shotgun blasts were heard. Pasadena police arrived in time to find the two burglars, Miguel Antonio DeJesus, 38, and Diego Ortiz, 30, dead from shotgun wounds in Horn's front yard. It was later determined through an autopsy that both men were shot in the back. It was also revealed that both men had long criminal pasts, including convictions on drug charges and deporations back to their home country of Colombia. Both men were involved in an organized burglary ring in Houston, which was the reason for the robbery that day.

As new information about the shootings was released each day afterwards, people became increasingly divided as to whether or not Joe Horn was a hero or a murderer. Protests were held in Horn's neighborhood in Pasadena, impassioned speeches were given denouncing Horn's actions, and articles condeming him as a "vigilante" appeared like clockwork in Houston's main newspaper. At the same time, people across the city lauded Horn as a hero for the times, one who had seen enough of the crime and violence that plagues certain areas of the city and decided to take action against it, and those people proclaimed that they'd welcome Joe Horn as their neighbor any time.

Arguments for both sides hinged upon a Texas law that allowed the use of deadly force to protect one's property. Since the two men were found on Horn's lawn, the decision was made not to arrest him or immediately charge him with a crime. Instead, any decision to indict him was left to a grand jury.

On June 30, 2008, that grand jury cleared Joe Horn of any wrongdoing and the debates were reignited. Was Joe Horn wrong for gunning down two criminals and playing judge, jury and executioner? Is our society wrong for giving more rights and consideration to criminals than victims?

Houstonist decided to let two of its staffers tackle both sides of the story, in a Houstonist vs. Houstonist debate. Their arguments are below, and in no way reflect the opinion of Houstonist or its editors or staffers as a whole.

Pro Joe Horn

Joe Horn, we’ve all heard his name in the news recently, the Pasadena homeowner defended his neighbor’s property by firing at, and killing, two criminals. Let’s just clarify the degree of criminal activity, the two burglars were criminals, twice-over.

First, neither had a legal right to be here (but, that’s not the heart of this issue) and second, they were busily engaged in relieving an honest, tax-paying individual(s) of their property. We’re guessing said property was paid for with legally gotten gains. Further, it is reported that a plainclothes officer arrived at the scene to witness one of the men running at Mr. Horn prior to veering off (we guess he saw the shotgun aimed at him).

While any loss of life is tragic, the right to arm yourself, defend your own property and that of your neighbors, well, it seems pretty commonsense. Effectively, this does not reduce our society to a “wild west” mentality as inferred by Quannel X, the lack of indictment upholds the theory that if you commit a crime you may be subject to a form of punishment – especially when someone racks a shotgun and tells you “Stop or you’re dead”.

This was no hate crime, and Joe Horn did not go looking for someone to shoot, like the infamous line in “Folsom Prison Blues”…”I shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die”, rather each of these men made the choice to steal (one might reasonable infer from the drug possession charges) for drug money and Joe Horn was not turning a blind eye on his neighbor’s right to keep his property, valuables and/or cash. Part of being free is the freedom to choose – that includes how we choose to live our lives, honestly or dishonestly. We are also free to defend property, ours and that of our neighbors, fortunately.

The level of outrage seems disparate to instances where business owners are killed during a crime – where are the protests? Where is Quannel? More importantly, where is the justice? This is not a question of race, religion or sexual orientation, it’s all about right (or legal) and wrong (or illegal) those boundaries are clearly defined by our legal system, which also allows a wounded or maimed criminal to sue the person trying to defend themselves (how wrong is that – it honestly makes us think, hmmm, moral of the story here is “dead men don’t sue”, which should not be the point!).

Bottom line, in the case of Joe Horn vs. the Criminal Element, justice was served, perhaps the hard way, but, if you don’t steal – you don’t have to face such events. The Second Amendment has existed for over two hundred years, here’s hoping it goes on, in perpetuity. We should all hope “Citizen Horn” is watching our residence.

Anti Joe Horn

Joe Horn isn't God. Joe Horn isn't a judge. He isn't a jury. The only role he played in this whole sordid affair was the executioner, a role which wasn't his to play.

What's worse, Joe Horn has brought national attention to a perceived mindset that Houston (and Texas) is a cowboy town, full of lawlessness and gun racks and thoughtless crimes perpetrated by criminals and regular citizens alike. We can't allow this stereotype to be perpetuated about our city, and we shouldn't allow miscarriages of justice like this case.

Joe Horn didn't know that these two men were recidivist criminals. He didn't have the full benefit of knowing exactly what was going on, that this was all part of a larger crime syndicate. He only knew that he saw suspicious activity going on at someone else's home -- not even his own house! -- and thoughtlessly took matters into his own hands.

What if appearances were deceiving and Mr. Horn shot two men who had no prior criminal activity and had simply made a poor decision that day? Worse, what if he hadn't seen things clearly and had accidentally shot the homeowners themselves, or friends of family of the homeowners? Are we saying that it's okay for people to suddenly start arming themselves to shoot at every suspicious activity they see, whether they're correct about their snap judgements or not?

Where could this lead? How about to a homeowner who absentmindedly locked themselves out of their house and is crawling through a bedroom window to get back in? Or to teenagers playing harmless pranks on a friend's lawn at night, creeping through the bushes to TP the trees and house? Should we shoot at them, too?

Even worse, Mr. Horn clearly indicated that this shooting was premeditated when he grabbed his shotgun and said the words: "I'm gonna shoot" and "I'm not going to let them get away with this." He wasn't confronted by these men; they never even would have known Mr. Horn was a witness to the entire robbery if he hadn't inserted himself into the situation with a shotgun. He wasn't defending his property. He wasn't defending his life. He was barely defending his neighbor's property.

He was clearly and concisely making a decision to kill these two men, just as one would decide to make a sandwich. He informed someone of this -- in a taped phone call, no less -- walked outside and shot two men down. He made the arbitrary decision that day that our legal system, our justice system, our rights as American citizens to due process and a fair trial by a jury of our peers was worthless. He made the decision to kill those men, and to ignore the Fifth Amendment as if it were just a piece of garbage.

And we let him get away with it.

Have an opinion? Share it with us in the comments section below.

---
Photo courtesy of flickr user darkhairedgirl.