Shooting victim was intoxicated

Posted on April 9, 2009. Filed under: dispute - strangers, South Dakota |

Brookings, South Dakota – Brad Odens, a 23-year-old electronics engineering technology student from Sioux Falls, was walking south toward his home at about 2 a.m. from a downtown bar about three blocks away. Intoxication may have been a factor in confusing the house at 129 S. Main Ave. from his own at 143 S. Main Ave, said Capt. Jeff Miller, who is leading the ongoing investigation.

“The door was locked, and he woke up the resident while trying to enter,” Miller said. “He was warned by the resident not to enter the home, and that he had a gun inside, but the victim was pretty insistent that it was his home and was making threats to the resident.” The resident, whose name has not been released because there are no charges filed, lives alone.

Miller said that Odens was warned by the 28-year-old male resident when he was inside the front entryway trying to enter a locked door to the main part of the house. After being warned several times, Odens broke the window on the upper part of main door. He was shot by the resident after breaking the window, Miller said.

Police do not believe that Odens and the resident of the house knew each other.
Police are submitting information about the case to the state’s attorney’s office for a final decision on whether charges will be filed.

“I think the standard is that if someone is breaking into your home, you have the right to protect yourself,” Miller said. “As tragic as this turned out … the home owner was in fear and didn’t know what [Odens’] intentions were.”  More on

Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

2 Responses to “Shooting victim was intoxicated”

RSS Feed for Gun Deaths in the United States Comments RSS Feed

you do not have the right to use deadly force in order to protect your property. There was a back door on the property, and this man had the legal duty to escape the premises, and since he did not exercise this option, he should not be able to claim self defense.

There was no legal duty involved to leave the premises. If you have a legal duty, you do not have options. You claim the shooter had the option of a legal duty to exercise. Sadly, you are wrong. He was warned multiple times, he broke a window to get into the property, and, sadly, was shot to death. I have met the guy before, he was very nice and was likable… but his death has stopped you from thinking objectively.

Where's The Comment Form?

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: