Md man shoots intruder, charged with murder

[Chris0nllyn]

A Glen Burnie man acted in self-defense when he shot and killed another man he suspected of having an affair with his wife, his attorney said Monday.

At a bail hearing for Matthew Pinkerton, 34, attorney Peter O’Neill said the victim, Kendall Green, broke into Pinkerton’s home on Arbor Drive just before 2 a.m. Sunday after being told repeatedly to leave.

Green, also of Glen Burnie, acted aggressively and motioned toward his waistband as if he had a weapon, O’Neill said.

Pinkerton shot Green once in the chest from 10 to 15 feet away, but Green continued to advance toward him, his wife Jessica and two friends who were at the house, O’Neill said. That’s when Pinkerton shot him again. He died at the scene.

“This is clearly self-defense,” O’Neill said.

Pinkerton was charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter and use of a firearm in a felony or violent crime.

The state argued that Pinkerton could have called 911.

District Court Judge Jonas Legum reduced Pinkerton’s bond from $1.5 million to $250,000.

Legum said he finds it “amazing” that the statement of probable cause against Pinkerton is only two pages long, and included only one sentence about whether or not Green had a weapon.

Pinkerton told police he did not see any weapons in Green’s hands, charging documents state.

Green had staked out the Pinkertons’ home before they arrived early Sunday morning, O’Neill said. When Green knocked on the door, Pinkerton retrieved a Glock 17 9mm handgun, put it in his back pocket and went to see who it was, police said. He wasn’t expecting any visitors.

When Pinkerton opened the door, he found Green on the porch, police said. Green demanded to see Jessica Pinkerton.

Matthew Pinkerton told Green to leave, but he refused and started to shout, police said.

The pair exchanged “derogatory” remarks before Pinkerton closed the front door, police said. Green continued to yell from the front porch, police said.

Pinkerton then heard his screen door being opened, police said. He headed back to the front door as Green broke through it, damaging the door frame, O’Neill said.

Pinkerton pulled his gun and ordered Green to leave, O’Neill said.

Green continued into the residence and was shot twice by Pinkerton, police said.

“He has the right to defend himself against an intruder,” O’Neill said.

Assistant State’s Attorney Glen Neubauer said Pinkerton could have called the police. When Pinkerton grabbed his gun, it was “bizarre behavior in itself,” Neubauer said.

But O’Neill said calling 911 wasn’t an option.

“By the time 911 is called, he’s dead,” O’Neill said.

Pinkerton, who is in the Air Force, suspected his wife was having an affair last year while he was on a work assignment in Korea, police said.

Pinkerton returned early from his Korea assignment and, upon entering his residence, found Green there with his wife, police said.

Jessica Pinkerton denied the allegations, police said. She would not comment on Monday.

O’Neill described the relationship between Jessica Pinkerton and Green as a “friendship.” When Jessica Pinkerton tried to end the relationship, Green continued to pursue it, O’Neill said.

Green and Matthew Pinkerton had at least one previous altercation, O’Neill said.

So far this year, there have been four homicides in the county and four more in the city of Annapolis.

Attorney: Glen Burnie shooting was self-defense - CapitalGazette.com: For The Record

 

[PsyOps]

Is there some requirement under MD law to call 911 during a home intrusion?

 

[abcxyz]

I think there is a lot more to this story but regardless, Maryland has gone full retard on guns and everybody know you never go full retard.

 

[Disco Stu]

Maryland's judges are all liberal democrats who want the state to control the lives of the citizens. Sad but true.

 

[MadDogMarine]

Is there some requirement under MD law to call 911 during a home intrusion?

It is my opinion this guy is going to the big house, being he is in Maryland!
Unless he has an excellent attorney who can establish to the jury he was in "fear for his life" The only mitigating factor is " Green broke through it, damaging the door frame," which does show a "violent intent" but does that intent rise to the level of needing lethal force?
I can hear the prosecuting attorney now. The defendant shot the intruder, NOT because he was in fear for his life, but because he was in a JEALOUS RAGE at a man having an affair with his wife. The intruder, NOT having a weapon,is going to go a long way in favor of the prosecution.
Cops would walk on this type shooting, not Maryland residents!
There is no law requiring a victim to call 911. Since all 911 calls are recorded and constitute evidence here is one recommendation made.
Being in Maryland(a retreat state), I would also suggest one yell for 911 recording that you are backing up and to stop, the police are coming.

In the CCW class I took, the instructor, a prior deputy, presented an interesting way to handle this IF you have the time. He stated call 911 and bring the phone with you or drop it nearby so everything is recorded on the 911 tapes and you can yell to the intruder to get down and comply with your commands or to leave or whatever, state that you're armed and will shoot and that the police are on the way. If he doesn't comply and if he comes toward you - he obviously means to harm you and is a danger to you - then you do whatever you need to do to protect yourself. Then, you have proof of what happened on the 911 recording. Pretty cut and dry in my opinion.

Now if you call 911 and then proclaim, "I'm going to kill your MF ass for bonking my wife", you got additional problems.
This guys future is all resting on how an argument is made. Maryland is a bad state to be a defendant in with this type of shooting.

 

[StadEMS3]

Sucks for him there were witnesses...

 

[Chris0nllyn]

It is my opinion this guy is going to the big house, being he is in Maryland!
Unless he has an excellent attorney who can establish to the jury he was in "fear for his life" The only mitigating factor is " Green broke through it, damaging the door frame," which does show a "violent intent" but does that intent rise to the level of needing lethal force?
I can hear the prosecuting attorney now. The defendant shot the intruder, NOT because he was in fear for his life, but because he was in a JEALOUS RAGE at a man having an affair with his wife. The intruder, NOT having a weapon,is going to go a long way in favor of the prosecution.
Cops would walk on this type shooting, not Maryland residents!
There is no law requiring a victim to call 911. Since all 911 calls are recorded and constitute evidence here is one recommendation made.
Being in Maryland(a retreat state), I would also suggest one yell for 911 recording that you are backing up and to stop, the police are coming.



Now if you call 911 and then proclaim, "I'm going to kill your MF ass for bonking my wife", you got additional problems.
This guys future is all resting on how an argument is made. Maryland is a bad state to be a defendant in with this type of shooting.

State v. Faulkner, 301 Md. 482, 485, 483 A.2d 759, 761 (1984),

The Court of Appeals of Maryland stated that a homicide is justified on the ground of self-defense if the following criteria are satisfied:
(1) The accused must have had reasonable grounds to believe himself in apparent imminent or immediate danger of death or serious bodily harm from his assailant or potential assailant;
(2) The accused must have in fact believed himself in this danger;
(3) The accused claiming the right of self defense must not have been the aggressor or provoked the conflict;
(4) The force used must have not been unreasonable and excessive, that is, the force

If this guy goes to jail, I'm convinced MD is gone for good.

 

[MadDogMarine]

Sucks for him there were witnesses...

One doesn't need any witnesses if you decide to be a witness against yourself!

Pinkerton told police he did not see any weapons in Green’s hands

People just don't know how to keep their mouth shut!

 

[MadDogMarine]

State v. Faulkner, 301 Md. 482, 485, 483 A.2d 759, 761 (1984),

The Court of Appeals of Maryland stated that a homicide is justified on the ground of self-defense if the following criteria are satisfied:
(1) The accused must have had reasonable grounds to believe himself in apparent imminent or immediate danger of death or serious bodily harm from his assailant or potential assailant;
(2) The accused must have in fact believed himself in this danger;
(3) The accused claiming the right of self defense must not have been the aggressor or provoked the conflict;
(4) The force used must have not been unreasonable and excessive, that is, the force

If this guy goes to jail, I'm convinced MD is gone for good.

Only element 3 is clearly in the defendants favor.
The rest are going to be argued by a an anti-gun prosecuting attorney looking for another conviction feather in his cap.
In my opinion, in Maryland, you either have to take a knife cut or be shot at to justify deadly force in self defense. And this needs to happen in your bedroom where you can no longer retreat. Look at the argument used against Zimmerman where his head was being bashed into a sidewalk, all in a "Stand Your Ground State". If Zimmerman had not had those injuries he probably would have been convicted.

 

[PsyOps]

State v. Faulkner, 301 Md. 482, 485, 483 A.2d 759, 761 (1984),

The Court of Appeals of Maryland stated that a homicide is justified on the ground of self-defense if the following criteria are satisfied:
(1) The accused must have had reasonable grounds to believe himself in apparent imminent or immediate danger of death or serious bodily harm from his assailant or potential assailant;
(2) The accused must have in fact believed himself in this danger;
(3) The accused claiming the right of self defense must not have been the aggressor or provoked the conflict;
(4) The force used must have not been unreasonable and excessive, that is, the force

If this guy goes to jail, I'm convinced MD is gone for good.

I was actually about to post this. Nowhere does it say you are required to call 911, even if you have the opportunity.

The other part is that he does have witnesses - his wife and friends. I doubt they will testify against him. But given there are witnesses, I imagine they were all questioned. There must be something else to this that isn't mentioned in the article as to why he's actually being charged. Unless, of course, we have an activist court system that is aimed at doing all they can to make the point that using firearmes, even in your own defense, is unacceptable in MD.

 

[Merlin99]

One doesn't need any witnesses if you decide to be a witness against yourself!


People just don't know how to keep their mouth shut!

Hands are lethal weapons also.

 

[PsyOps]

One doesn't need any witnesses if you decide to be a witness against yourself!

Pinkerton told police he did not see any weapons in Green’s hands

People just don't know how to keep their mouth shut!

I don't think there is any requirement that the intruder must have a weapon in order to use lethal force to defend yourself.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Only element 3 is clearly in the defendants favor.
The rest are going to be argued by a an anti-gun prosecuting attorney looking for another conviction feather in his cap.
In my opinion, in Maryland, you either have to take a knife cut or be shot at to justify deadly force in self defense. And this needs to happen in your bedroom where you can no longer retreat. Look at the argument used against Zimmerman where his head was being bashed into a sidewalk, all in a "Stand Your Ground State". If Zimmerman had not had those injuries he probably would have been convicted.

If it weren't election time, I doubt this would have gone to court.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

I don't think there is any requirement that the intruder must have a weapon in order to use lethal force to defend yourself.

I don't think so either, but dependiong on the prosecutor, they could use that against him.

"How could you fear for your life, as someone in the military, from someone who didn't have a weapon"?

 

[Midnightrider]

First, I am sure there is more to the story.

BUT, I have no problem with this guy being charged. The police shouldn't be deciding if this was a justified shooting or not. They shiuld collect the evidence and present it to the prosecutor. If everything is as represented the guy should be acquitted with little difficulty. If there is more to it a jury should decide if it was a good shoot.

 

[MadDogMarine]

I don't think there is any requirement that the intruder must have a weapon in order to use lethal force to defend yourself.

Don't people understand this has NOTHING TO DO with "requirements". It has EVERYTHING to do with "ARGUMENTS" before a jury that is selected from a liberal gun hating state.

Use of lethal force has to be "REASONABLE". That is a subjective term that can fall on either side of the argument based on who is selected for the jury.

That is why before the trigger is pulled, one has to ensure the argument points weigh more heavily in your favor.These are NOT(legal or otherwise) requirements!
In your favor:
1)Call 911
2)Make some effort(for argument purposes) that you made an attempt to retreat.
3)Keep your mouth shut. Because of his big mouth, the argument he COULD have made that he DID NOT KNOW if the assailant had a weapon or not was destroyed by his foolish statement to the police. NOT KNOWING gives a greater effect to arguing you were in fear for your life!
4)After shooting the intruder, immediately render first aid. Based upon the circumstances,this very act could reduce a criminal charge from murder(no intent to kill) to a lessor manslaughter charge.

IT IS ALL ARGUMENT!

 

[Chris0nllyn]

First, I am sure there is more to the story.

BUT, I have no problem with this guy being charged. The police shouldn't be deciding if this was a justified shooting or not. They shiuld collect the evidence and present it to the prosecutor. If everything is as represented the guy should be acquitted with little difficulty. If there is more to it a jury should decide if it was a good shoot.

Easy to say when you're not the one paying $25,000 to get bailed out, or another $25,000 for lawyer fees.

 

[Midnightrider]

Easy to say when you're not the one paying $25,000 to get bailed out, or another $25,000 for lawyer fees.

Meh, I believe in justice. If that means you go through the system when you kill someone that's fine with me. I would see that as a small price to pay. (Your estimate of defense costs is probably way low).

Like I said, I am betting there is more to the story, if there isn't it should be a slam dunk acquittal.

 

[MadDogMarine]

Easy to say when you're not the one paying $25,000 to get bailed out, or another $25,000 for lawyer fees.

This news was released 17 Sept.2013(Tuesday) citing the event to have occurred on Sunday(15 Sept.?)
It took a whole ONE day to investigate, review the facts, and CHARGE this man with MURDER!
They want this guy bad and are probably going to get him!

 

[ArkRescue]

I don't think so either, but dependiong on the prosecutor, they could use that against him.

"How could you fear for your life, as someone in the military, from someone who didn't have a weapon"?

It would be easy for someone to choke me to death in the time it took me to call 911 - they broke through my door and I'm not supposed to be in fear of my life? Really?