1286 users online (189 members and 1097 guests)  


Websleuths News


Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    3,212

    CA - Samuel Cutrufelli for shooting homeowner during burglary, Greenbrae, 2012

    Crime

    91-Year-Old Man Survives Being Shot in the Face by Robber — So Why Do Police Still Have HIS Guns More Than a Year Later?

    Apr. 25, 2013 11:52pm | Jason Howerton

    More than a year after a man tried to kill him after breaking into his home, a 91-year-old World War II veteran’s collection of firearms and other belongings are still being held by the police.

    On Jan. 3, 2012, Jay Leone, who was 90 at the time, was confronted by a ruthless home intruder at his home in Greenbrae, Calif. Police say Samuel Cutrufelli, a meth addict with an assault record, broke into the residence, put a gun to Leone’s head, tied his wrists, blindfolded him and tore his bedroom apart looking for valuables to steal.

    Leone, who is a proud gun collector and World War II veteran, testified in court that he was able to get his hands free and convinced the burglar to let him use the bathroom where he retrieved one of his five guns from the bathroom.

    The homeowner then confronted the criminal, sparking a gunfight. Leone hit Cutrufelli several times in the body, however, Leone was also shot once in the face during the gunfight.

    Both men survived and a Marin County, Calif. jury later convicted Cutrufelli, 31, of attempted murder, robbery, burglary and other crimes. Last Thursday, Judge Andrew Sweet sentenced him to 86 years to life in state prison, the Marin Independent Journal reports. Cutrufelli also tried to later sue Leone for firing back at him “negligently.”

    It is now more than a year later and the attempted murderer is behind bars, so why does Leone not have his guns, bullets, watches and jewelry back?
    Read more:

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...-a-year-later/

    http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-cou...vived-gunfight

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Georgia -- Redneck Country
    Posts
    7,175
    Why in the heck did they seize all of his weapons and jewerly etc....to begin with? Only ONE of his firearms was used during the encounter, the rest presumably never left his home as the attacker was shot in the home.

    If they never left his home and were not used during the encounter how are they evidence in this case?

    Does this mean if a homeowner undergoes an attempted burglary the police will show up, go through the victim's home and seize ALL of their valuables?

    Am I misunderstanding what happened? Did the criminal actually manage to steal all of that stuff and remove it from the home?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    21,160
    LE takes whatever valuable the intruder had in his possession for court. Everything will be returned to him or his estate. jmo

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Georgia -- Redneck Country
    Posts
    7,175
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    LE takes whatever valuable the intruder had in his possession for court. Everything will be returned to him or his estate. jmo
    That just does not seem right. If the **** appeals (and he probably will) then they will continue to hold all of the man's stuff for years and he may never see it again!

    It is HIS property! He obviously cherishes those possessions and if he needed money he should have the right to sell them. Seems to me the man is being victimized twice. Plus with the constantly changing CA gun laws it is quite possible he could NOT legally replace any of the weapons that were taken from him because they can't be purchased in CA any longer.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,348
    If the case is under appeal, LE needs to hold on to the physical evidence. Unless of course you want the conviction to fall apart and the prisoner freed.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    21,160
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonya610 View Post
    That just does not seem right. If the **** appeals (and he probably will) then they will continue to hold all of the man's stuff for years and he may never see it again!

    It is HIS property! He obviously cherishes those possessions and if he needed money he should have the right to sell them. Seems to me the man is being victimized twice.
    He has 30 days to appeal. After that I believe they would return the items if the victim asks for them and I'm guessing he already has. Had they not caught this person his possessions would have been gone forever. This gentleman still has them they are just in the custody of the State. jmo

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Georgia -- Redneck Country
    Posts
    7,175
    Quote Originally Posted by Cappuccino View Post
    If the case is under appeal, LE needs to hold on to the physical evidence. Unless of course you want the conviction to fall apart and the prisoner freed.
    The way I see it the guy as convicted of attempted murder. Seems they should have enough evidence (especially if they collected the criminal from inside the man's home) to keep the attempted murder conviction and the theft of items would be secondary.

    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    Had they not caught this person his possessions would have been gone forever. This gentleman still has them they are just in the custody of the State. jmo
    I did not get the impression the POLICE stopped the robbery. The man shot the burglar several times and he prevented his items from being stolen himself. I guess if he had simply killed the criminal then they wouldn't have confiscated all of his things forever. Food for thought.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    21,160
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonya610 View Post
    The way I see it the guy as convicted of attempted murder. Seems they should have enough evidence (especially if they collected the criminal from inside the man's home) to keep the attempted murder conviction and the theft of items would be secondary.



    I did not get the impression the POLICE stopped the robbery. The man shot the burglar several times and he prevented his items from being stolen himself. I guess if he had simply killed the criminal then they wouldn't have confiscated all of his things forever. Food for thought.
    If the burglar had the items in his possession whether he left the residence or not they are evidence. If the man had everything hidden they would not be considered evidence and LE would have no reason to take them. jmo



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 36
    Last Post: 04-21-2017, 08:16 AM
  2. GUILTY CO - James Graves burglary to steal pic of 12yo girl, Grand Junction, 2012
    By Filly in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-29-2015, 10:27 PM
  3. GUILTY IN - Danzele Johnson, 21, fatally shot by homeowner, Elkhart, 3 Oct 2012
    By concernedmother in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-09-2015, 06:23 AM
  4. OK - Homeowner hogties burglary suspect, calls police & heads to work
    By PoirotryInMotion in forum Crimes in the News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-04-2013, 04:31 PM

Tags for this Thread