A Baltimore jewelry store owner who fatally shot a man believed to be breaking into his store will not face charges after the local prosecutor determined the armed citizen was acting in self-defense.
The incident took place around 2 a.m. on October 16, when the store’s owner, who lives above the shop in Baltimore’s Canton neighborhood, confronted a man allegedly trying to break in to the business.
According to a friend of the armed citizen, he was upstairs watching a movie when he heard the break-in, and discovered someone had broken through the glass front door using a brick. Arming himself, the man first fired what was described as a warning shot, then yelled for the suspect to freeze.
The intruder reportedly ducked, but when he popped his head up the armed citizen fired at the suspect, believing that he was armed and his life was in danger.
After a police investigation and a review by the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Homicide Office, prosecutor Ivan Bates declared on Monday that his office will not be charging the business owner.
Under Maryland law, a crime can be ruled as self-defense or defense of habitation if it meets the following five factors:
- A suspect attempted to enter a home or property
- The property owner believes the person intends to commit a crime that would lead to death or serious injury
- The property owner believes the suspect intends to commit a crime
- The property owner believes that the force used was necessary to prevent death or injury
- The property owner reasonably believed force was necessary
In the case of [the suspect Richard] Rolfe, the State’s Attorney’s investigation found that he entered or tried to enter a person’s home, and the homeowner believed Rolfe intended to commit a crime that would lead to injury or death.
The investigation also found that the homeowner believed the force used against Rolfe was necessary to prevent death or injury.
According to the investigation, the homeowner believed Rolfe was armed. It was later discovered that he did not have a gun.
“Based on the investigation in this case, it can be said that the homeowner was acting appropriately under the defense of the habitation doctrine. While it was later determined that Mr. Rolfe did not have a gun, it is reasonable that the homeowner believed Mr. Rolfe was armed,” Bates said in a statement.
While Maryland is not a “Stand Your Ground” state, there is no duty to retreat when a resident is defending themselves against someone breaking into their home, so long as there is a reasonable belief that they’re protecting themselves from an assault that could lead to death or serious injury.
I’m somewhat surprised, though pleasantly so, that Bates determined that the business owner/resident did have a reasonable belief that his life was in danger from the late-night intruder. The prosecutor could have argued that since the armed citizen did not see a gun in Rolfe’s hand, he had no reason to believe that the intruder was armed or wished him harm. It might have been tough to persuade a jury to go along with that argument, but we’ve seen plenty of cases where zealous prosecutors have charged gun owners after they’ve acted in self-defense, even if they were actively defending themselves against an actual assault.
Maryland is still home to all kinds of gun control laws that make it difficult to exercise our right to armed self-defense, including its Handgun Qualification License that requires live-fire training and a government-issued permission slip simply to keep a handgun in the home. On occasion, though, common sense can prevail, and that seems to be the case in Baltimore regarding this armed citizen and his defensive gun use.
Editor’s Note: The Schumer Shutdown is here. Rather than put the American people first, Chuck Schumer and the radical Democrats forced a government shutdown for healthcare for illegals. They own this.
Help us continue to report the truth about the Schumer Shutdown. Use promo code POTUS47 to get 74% off your VIP membership.
Read the full article here


