Estimated reading time: 3 minutes
An Indiana homeowner who armed himself and went outside to investigate a suspicious person is now facing a reckless homicide charge.
According to WANE 15, 30-year-old Martell Pickens is accused of fatally shooting 25-year-old Khadolphee Demarco Taylor in southeast Fort Wayne.
The shooting happened around 2:45 a.m. on May 7 in the 500 block of East Rudisill Boulevard. Police were responding to reports of a suspicious person attempting to enter vehicles and a home when dispatchers received word that the homeowner had shot someone.
Officers found Taylor suffering from a gunshot wound to his chest. They rendered aid before he was transported to a hospital, where he later died. The Allen County Coroner’s Office identified him and ruled his death a homicide.
Pickens remained at the scene and surrendered his Glock .45-caliber handgun, according to court records obtained by 21Alive.
Pickens reportedly told investigators that he woke up and learned someone was attempting to enter vehicles in the neighborhood. He armed himself, left his home and confronted Taylor.
Surveillance footage allegedly showed Taylor wandering around the neighborhood for an extended period. Police said he attempted to open Pickens’ screen door, walked away and later returned.
Immediately before the shooting, Pickens was reportedly standing near his parked vehicle when Taylor approached from the driver’s side. The recording captured Pickens yelling, “What are you doing?” and “Back up.”
Pickens told investigators that Taylor continued moving toward him, so he fired once. Court documents say Pickens acknowledged that Taylor was unarmed and appeared intoxicated or impaired.
SEE ALSO: Henry Big Boy Revolver Review: A .357 With Soul
Investigators also learned that officers had stopped Taylor approximately 20 minutes earlier. Police reportedly noticed behavior consistent with intoxication or mental impairment. Taylor’s vehicle was towed because his license was suspended, and officers told him to walk home.
Police do not believe the shooting was justified under Indiana’s self-defense law.
Indiana generally does not require a person to retreat when deadly force is otherwise justified. However, that does not make every shooting of an approaching person lawful. Indiana law still requires a reasonable belief that deadly force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury, stop a forcible felony or prevent an unlawful entry or attack on a home, its curtilage or an occupied vehicle.
Detective Brian Martin wrote that Pickens “knowingly armed himself and voluntarily exited the safety of his residence to confront Taylor.”
That decision appears to be central to the charge. Investigators allege that Taylor was unarmed and had not presented a threat serious enough to justify deadly force when Pickens fired.
Pickens has been charged, but he has not been convicted. Prosecutors will still have to prove their case, and his defense will have an opportunity to challenge the state’s version of events.
Self-defense doesn’t end when the threat goes down. That’s when the real battle begins. Lawyers. Prosecutors. Headlines. USCCA Members never fight that battle alone. Find out how.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.
Guys, just cooked up a bunch of fresh popcorn. Come on over
If the police did their job and took the deceased into custody when they towed his car none of this would have happened.
FIRST, how close does the law say they have to be to consider it “defense” when someone comes at you. Second, Is it now AGAINST THE LAW to go outside to defend Your property. And THIRD, how long must we put up with leftist liberal law enforcement that will arrest and prosecute people that do defend life and property from someone that law enforcement has ALREADY stopped, deemed a danger to themselves and released, only to continue on and do more illegal stuff. PROSECUTE THE COPS for not doing THEIR JOBS and protect the community.
Jeesh, dude. You just can’t shoot someone for staggering onto your lawn or back yard. Unless there is evidence that the shooters life was at risk, he had no reason to kill the guy. Someone “coming at you” isn’t grounds to shoot, without some other objective action that deadly violence was imminent.
Someone coming at you is not enough? What other objective action is necessary?
What if the person coming at you is 30 years younger and much stronger than you are? Is waiting until the aggressor has his hands on you the objective action that you speak of?
The shooter was recorded saying “Back up”. The deceased did not respect this warning and paid dearly for it.
Deadly force is only available to terminate someone else’s criminal deadly force. No facts depicting criminal deadly force (weapon, verbal threat, raised arms in combat position, etc.) are present. You can use non-deadly force to repel non-deadly criminality.
I didn’t write the law, I’m only giving the best free legal advice to keep gun folk from rotting in jail. Argue with the state legislature.
Why leave your home with gun to confront someone outside.
Foolish
The guy was stoned drunk and lost. He couldn’t even find his house. That does not give anyone the right to shoot him.
But yet a stupid ass woman in Florida gets out of her car with a gun and badgers a guy until he walks toward her and then kills him and gets off.
Sounds like a double standard, maybe it was because it was a black woman and the DA didn’t want the town burned to the ground if she was held responsible?
Do stupid stuff win stupid prizes. You don’t get to shoot unarmed people who aren’t a reasonable threat (unless you are a cop).
I knew when I read the comments what I would see. A bunch of so-called men thinking murder is always their first and best choice when it comes to almost any situation. People think they can be vigilantes and won’t be held accountable. It is ignorant and stupid and this toxic echo chamber will likely result in the homeowner a long prison sentence and a severe financial impact on him and his family. Don’t be a cowboy.
Why would average people think any different? If this was a cop, he would be on a 2 week paid vacation and everyone in the comments would be saying “play stupid games, win stupid prizes.” Talking about the victim.
Not disagreeing with you, but what do you expect when the law gets away the same stuff? Why would someone think any different?
I was taught to handle gun by marine who survived several landings in Pacific during WW2. His rule was to empty gun into target unless their was potential second target or short on ammo. Rule served him well.
In his back yard?????
He “left the safety of his home’. That’s what got him.
Maybe if the cops would have arrested when he was stopped 20 minutes earlier, he would have been in the safety of the jail?
The homeowner has a right to protect his vehicle, does he not? Kinda have to exit the inside to protect outside.
Government failing to do it’s initial response so now go after the law abiding…..who are fed up with lawlessness.
“The homeowner has a right to protect his vehicle, does he not?” NOT WITH DEADLY FORCE.
“Maybe if the cops would have arrested when he was stopped 20 minutes earlier”. FOR WHAT? He wasn’t driving drunk. He was walking drunk when he was stopped.
Indiana Code § 7.1-5-1-3 prohibits public intoxication, which is defined as being in a public place while intoxicated to the point of endangering oneself or others, or breaching the peace. Violating this law can result in a Class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to 180 days in jail and fines up to $1,000.
Public intox as a misdemeanor under the statute requires the suspect be observed in the process of harassing, annoying, alarming, or endangering the life of someone. There is no evidence that AT THE TIME OF THE POLICE STOP that he was doing any of those things.
Or how about this one?
“The police stopped him…” my English has that statement as he was driving.
Therefore
Driving on a suspended license in Indiana is considered a Class A misdemeanor, which can result in up to one year in jail and fines up to $5,000. If an accident occurs while driving on a suspended license, it may escalate to a felony charge, leading to more severe penalties.
Enabling is not a Christian Value.
You are as much of the problem in our society as are the derelict police & the now deceased person.
He wasn’t driving when stopped. He was walking.
Sounds like you were there & saw everything. You will make a great witness for the prosecution.
Why did they tow his vehicle then?
He was stopped, found to be intoxicated AND driving on a suspended license, so they towed his vehicle and allowed him to continue on foot. Is reading comprehension hard for you?
Driving on a suspended license is an arrestable offense, as is driving while intoxicated. They shouldn’t have sent him on his way, and he’d almost certainly still be alive if they’d done their jobs. These are objective facts, not opinions.
Uncle Jimbo, you should take the fecal matter out of your eyes. Nowhere in the above article does it say he was stopped WHILE driving. Walking while intoxicated with your car nearby isn’t an arrestable offense.
He wasn’t driving drunk? So why the hell did they tow his vehicle? Making him walk home is irresponsible, they should have took him home.
From the article: “Taylor’s vehicle was towed because his license was suspended..”.
Instead of blaming cops, blame the drunk idiot. The homeowner will be judged by a jury.
The cops were the problem here. As usual, took the easy way out by taking the car and letting the problem moron wander around the neighborhood. The job isn’t just about a pendion and free donuts. If you don’t want to fo your duty, get another job.
I am rather shocked at the comments on this post. Obviously the majority of commenters on this page have never taken a concealed carry course or any type of firearms safety course that addressed self defense laws.
I have been a firearms instructor for over 20 years in 3 states and what Mr. Pickens did is clearly against the law in most states. According to the article, the drunken or drug impaired person was not breaking into Mr. Pickens home or car. The person was not armed. No, a person not backing away or approaching someone is not reason to use deadly force (even if the person is cussing and yelling, which was not reported thus far). You have no obligation (other than common sense) to follow the orders of another citizen. I just don’t want people being in this same position as Mr. Pickens. If he cannot prove that the impaired person was threatening his life, which will be hard to do as Mr. Pickens left his home to confront the man and the man was unarmed, then he most likely will be found guilty. His family will suffer a huge loss of income defending his actions, and he will probably loose his rights to own a firearm.
In addition, this event (as written) will hurt all of us who own firearms. More ammunition for the anti gun side who want all guns taken away or registered.
If you think (based upon only what was reported in the article) that this shooting was legally justified, then please take a firearms course that addresses the laws in your state, before you find yourself in Mr. Pickens situation. In New Mexico, I am reasonably sure Mr. Pickens would be in jail for 1st degree murder.
This is also a good reason to be responsible with alcohol and drugs and teach your kids to be the same.
Thank you, Sir.
So Indianna law enforcement allow an “under influence” walk and not have him picked up by someone, he continues with bad decisions and now they turn fault on homeowner who IS NOT TRAINED to make judgement call on deadly threat decisions! The person proceeded towards him and who knows if he didn’t have a hidden weapon! It’s your property and you have the LAWFUL RIGHT to be in or outside on it!!
I am a conservative, a gun owner, and a2A supporter but I am saddened to see some of the mean-spirited comments on this post and on others like this!
then go elsewhere to read…………p.s. don’t let the server hit you on the ass when you go.
Paul, didn’t say you didn’t have a right to make the comment! Just remember that the comment a person posts reveals the depth of their character.
gary, having a good character and dead is just advantage criminal. on a side note “I am a conservative, a gun owner, and a2A supporter” is a common statement made by commie left gun haters………
Wrong again Paul! Definitely not a commie! and the comment about character was not related to the shooter!
By the way, have you taken any defensive handgun courses?
I can’t say whether what the shooter did was justified or not because I wasn’t there. I do agree with those who made comments about knowing the law and being responsible gun owners. And also the damage that the actions of irresponsible gun owner can do to those of us who are responsible gun owners.
My comment was based mainly on the spirit of many of the comments on this thread. I was always taught to treat others as I would like to be treated. That’s in the Bible isn’t it?! I think that also includes the words that come out of our mouth or the keyboard as it may be.
remember the criminal don’t care how you want to be treated, his only goal is to come out a winner and in most cases they get a nut off on the carnage and damage they can inflict so don’t preach to me about other gun owners or image when if i wind up in that situation i will always try my damndest to come out alive, since at this time i doubt any gun owners will come to my aid!!!
i am well aware of whom the comment was directed at………my training doesn’t side with hollywood/ marquis of queensbury rules /ethics it is more of surviving in a situation where i’m at a disadvantage, so spare me the advantage criminal training canned scenario cool badass training sales pitch.
remember the criminal don’t care how you want to be treated, his only goal is to come out a winner and in most cases they get a nut off on the carnage and damage they can inflict so don’t preach to me about other gun owners or image when if i wind up in that situation i will always try my damndest to come out alive, since at this time i doubt any gun owners will come to my aid!!!
Hi Paul,
I think you and I agree on more than we disagree on regarding the use of lethal force and defending ourselves and or families!
Got to go and help prepare for a family reunion at our house this weekend.
I’ve enjoyed our discussion and I wish you and your family all the best! God bless and have a great weekend!
well i hope your reunion went well!
I’m sorry to hear about the incident and loss of life.
This poor judgement on the part of Pickens will hurt all gun owners.
If you have a gun, take some form of firearms training course that reviews the applicable laws in your state. In most states what Pickens did was unlawful. If one wants to be a policemen then join the force. Hopefully, the details will demonstrate that Mr. Pickens believed his life was being threatened. If not, this event is just more ammunition for the anti-gun nuts out there.
Notice how the criminal moron media abstain from stating the ethnicity and showing a picture of the ghetto trash criminal that was breaking into cars.
People have had enough of this crap all across this country.
I personally had my Toyota Tundra stripped of its catalytic converters twice on two different trucks.
Would you like to know what I would do if I would’ve caught them in the action!
By the way, that’s $8500 a pop when they do that on these Tundras!
Ok, we all know you are a proud racist. Are you saying non–white people commit all crimes? Grow up. How is race relevant here? I live in a predominantly white part of the country and we have high crime rates most of which are committed by poor white people.
A prudent homeowner would have called 911 and secured safety in his home and waited for police. The homeowner had time and distance on his side, and should have let the cops deal with the trespasser. Now he’s going to have to convince a jury he did the right thing, and they may be difficult to do.
Yes, a pansy ass coward would’ve done exactly what you do and this is the reason why these criminals do what they do because of pansy ass cowards like you!
Some merit to your rant, but the anti-pansy may find himself stripped of his whole life – home, guns, freedom – for not letting the cops handle an outside burglary.
You do things your way. I know what I am willing to risk.
TB – Protecting my family from the safety of my home, while calling the police to deal with the perceived threat, and staying out of the courtroom is being a prudent man, not a pansy ass coward as you suggest. Reckless scallywags much like yourself will eventually either get killed or find themselves in a courtroom being judged by a jury. Choose wisely my friend.
“voluntarily exited the safety of his residence”
Safety of his residence? How safe is a residence when someone is trying to break in?
Someone trying to break into my house would cause me to arm myself.
So, I guess you’re supposed to wait until the guy is close enough that you could be disarmed or in hand-to-hand combat before you shoot anyone that is approaching you in any type of threatening manner and they refuse to stop on command to do so. How absurd.
Hello everyone, another case of dumb police holding a homeowner guilty for protecting his property. Mr. Pickens was doing his duty as a Free American . I would do the same and I hope all of you would do the same too!
So, I guess you’re supposed to wait until the guy is close enough that you could be disarmed or in hand-to-hand combat before you shoot anyone that is approaching you in any type of threatening manner and they refuse to stop on command to do so. How absurd.
Amazing – isn’t it? Fifty states, all with their own self defense laws, depending on where you live. You can choose between a state ran by 2A hating retarded liberals that don’t recognize your rights to protect your family, self, or property. Then you have the exact opposite, conservative ran states that believe in our rights under GOD and our Constitution.
This POS made a bad choice in life, and it cost him his. Now this homeowner has to deal with a left-wing judicial system that believes in a revolving door justice system and all that entails.
Indiana is not a liberal state. Grow up. What the homeowner did was not legally a good idea even in a state with strong stand your ground laws.
“Investigators also learned that officers had stopped Taylor approximately 20 minutes earlier. Police reportedly noticed behavior consistent with intoxication or mental impairment. Taylor’s vehicle was towed because his license was suspended, and officers told him to walk home.”
Why TF didn’t they take him into custody, or give him a ride home? Idiots!
“Police do not believe the shooting was justified under Indiana’s self-defense law.
Indiana generally does not require a person to retreat when deadly force is otherwise justified. However, that does not make every shooting of an approaching person lawful. Indiana law still requires a reasonable belief that deadly force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury, stop a forcible felony or prevent an unlawful entry or attack on a home, its curtilage or an occupied vehicle.”
“…prevent an unlawful entry or attack on a home, its curtilage or an occupied vehicle.”
Which is exactly what the homeowner was doing.
“Detective Brian Martin wrote that Pickens “knowingly armed himself and voluntarily exited the safety of his residence to confront Taylor.””
So it is now against the law to arm yourself and exit your house? The charges are based on pure police ego. “I’m a cop and you’re not. You’re not qualified to defend yourself and your home. I’m the expert.”
Apparently the detective thinks damage or theft to home and property is OK. The detective wants the homeowner to cower in his house while people steal his or his neighbors property. How thoughtful. Hopefully the jury will show more sense then the 11 people on the Lindsey Clancy case.
I knew when I read the comments what I would see. A bunch of so-called men thinking murder is always their first and best choice when it comes to almost any situation. People think they can be vigilantes and won’t be held accountable. It is ignorant and stupid and this toxic echo chamber will likely result in the homeowner a long prison sentence and a severe financial impact on him and his family. Don’t be a cowboy.
well what if i go outside and yell “what are doing?” and he comes at me?, this may very well be what happened.
What damage? I didnt read anything about the dead man causing any property damage or breaking into anything. He may have tried a door, but that means almost nothing. You cant be sure of his intent. Just recently there was a white kid who was shot because he went to the wrong house thinking it was his friend’s. That could be perceived as him trying to burgle a house, but obviously he wasnt. The homeowner might think he is protecting the world, but he isnt doing anything but endangering others. So many people just can’t wait to use their guns on someone. A lot of that comes from fear mongering by many in the gun industry so they can sell you the latest self-defense equipment. The fact is, we are safer now than latest almost anytime in our history based on crime stats.
more advantage criminal, let them do what they want and punish the homeowner, i hope he gets acquitted and maybe the next guy will stay away from that neighborhood!