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
304 points

Donofrio repeatedly knocked, banged and kicked on the front door “while manipulating the door handle” while trying to enter the home.

Donofrio broke a glass window on the front door “and reached inside to manipulate the doorknob”

Yeah, that’s more than just trying to walk into the wrong house when you’re blackout drunk, so I can see why they would consider it justified. But that’s the word of the police, so we’ll see if a different story comes out later.

permalink
report
reply
83 points

We’ll only ever hear one side of this story because the other witness is dead.

permalink
report
parent
reply
98 points
*

No, they have physical evidence, audio evidence which probably means camera or video doorbell and the kid died on the front porch of someone else’s house. Seems like the story told itself. The simple explanation is he tried breaking into the wrong house thinking it was his own.

Not saying he deserved to die over his mistake, it’s tragic and sad that the situation occurred.

Editing to add this from the article:

“evidence gathered at the scene, review of surveillance video that captures moments before the shooting, audio evidence, and witness statements.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

What would the other side of the story be? That he was breaking into his own house, but that the gun was fired from someone that had already broken into his own house and was wrongfully residing there? The facts are pretty basic here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

You are reading as though it is undisputed facts. One reason it is undisputed is because the victim is dead. For one it would be nice to see how likely it was he actually broke glass or reached inside. Was it clear video from a camera at the door? Or some grainy footage from a neighbor across the street? It doesn’t say.

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

Yikes. This is terrifying.

I feel bad for the owner who had to make a split second decision on what to do.

Because not much difference between rowdy drunk kid and a mentally deranged person. And making the wrong choice could mean your whole family is in danger.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

20 years old is an grown man, not a kid.

Hard to imagine I’d not do the same thing if that happened to my house with my family home.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Would you have possibly tried, I dunno, yelling first? Seems like if you’re already armed there wouldn’t be much danger in say “WHAT THE FUCK ARE DOING?”. It says nowhere in this story they actually tried stopping him, just that they phoned the cops, window broke, they shot him.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points
*

Before you get to the point of destroying your own property, you should have already double checked which unit you’re at, whether a family member has a spare key, or whether someone you know can let you stay the night so you can call a locksmith in the morning. It’s entirely reasonable for someone inside to think that it’s an attempted break-in, so even if the guy just made a really bad choice that ended in tragedy, I don’t blame the shooter for thinking it was a robbery, and not wanting to risk the supposed robber having a weapon. It’s not an easy choice to make in that situation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

When I was in college I had this happen multiple times. In different apartments but they all looked similar.

Even had one dude peeing on the floor in my bathroom because I roommate was next door and didn’t lock the door. Dude was in the right apartment number, just off one building.

Even had a couple get aggressive and try to fight me.

Still, never shot anyone over it (and I was and am a gun owner. )

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Don’t you think it might’ve been different if it was your own home (instead of a rented dorm/apartment), and instead of roommates you had a wife and possibly other family members in the home?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

This is true, and nuance is key.

But at the same time, at least in my college town, the houses on and around campus, certainly within 2 miles, were generally

  1. Quite often used as rentals for college kids, VERY few families actually lived there, in fact i never remember seeing families in them.

  2. Working class adults were more or less segregated further off campus, largely due to the riffraff.

So yes, it would be a bit different now as I do not live near a college campus. But if i did, and it was often that there were drunk college kids, the witching out after the bars let out would usually be times when ruckus was occuring. So situationally, i would be much less likely to use a gun in a case like that. I would likely have it on me while I assessed the situation but much less likely to use it.

Thats just me though. And FWIW i did live in houses off campus in my later years, and much of the same bullshit would occur. Maybe it was just a different time. I was not much of a partier, and took some hard sciences so often I was leaving the library when the drunks let out. And some of the shit they would pull…Lets just say I would never live near other college kids again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

It doesn’t say if the people in the home ever told him to stop. Did he know there were people in there? If he did, why did he break the window?

permalink
report
parent
reply

He thought he was locked out of his home I’m sure.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Ouch. Yep, that’s justifiable homicide

permalink
report
parent
reply

Not in my state. No deadly threat, no clear intent to commit a felony. Breaking in is not enough for precisely this reason: the person entering may have a mistaken claim of right.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Breaking and entering isn’t a felony in your state???, huh…

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Okay, well, it’s justifiable homicide in South Carolina

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. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. 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

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 525K

    Comments