Firearms Brandished and One Shot Fired Over Gas Siphoning in Trinidad This Morning

Gunshot shot feature iconPress release from the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office:

On Feb. 21, 2019, at about 5:39 a.m., Humboldt County Sheriff’s deputies were dispatched to a residence on the 700 block of Edwards Street in Trinidad for a shooting investigation.

According to the victim, just prior to contacting law enforcement, the victim observed an unknown male suspect siphoning gas from his vehicle. The victim, armed with a firearm, confronted the suspect. The suspect reportedly began to walk away when the victim demanded that he stop. The suspect then reportedly brandished a firearm at the victim, at which time the victim fired one shot at the suspect. It is unknown if the suspect was struck, however no evidence of injury was located at the scene. The suspect then ran to his vehicle and fled the scene.

The suspect is described as a white male adult, possibly in his 30’s, approximately 6 feet tall, thin build and approximately 150 pounds. He was last seen wearing a dark-colored hoodie, dark-colored jeans and a dark-colored beanie. The suspect’s vehicle is described as a dark-colored sedan with a loud exhaust.

This incident is still under investigation.

Anyone with information regarding this case or related criminal activity is encouraged to call the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office at (707) 445-7251 or the Sheriff’s Office Crime Tip line at (707) 268-2539.

Facebooktwitterpinterestmail

Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules

Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

56 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Perspective
Guest
Perspective
5 years ago

Next time

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  Perspective

yeah next time some innocent neighbor might get hit by this dumbass’s stray bullet. this was a little dick issue. the suspect was walking away, the suspect was not committing a felony, the gun owner will mostly likely lose the right to bear arms. but this is Humboldt County so i’m sure nothing will happen.

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

it was 44 and it was 5th street. the problem here is that suspect didn’t use his gun until the victim did and was walking away.

Ryan
Guest
Ryan
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

Local observer people like you are absolutely ridiculous. You’re really making excuses for an armed thief? You’re really saying that the poor robber only pulled his gun out in self defense after the homeowner confronted a trespasser while armed on HIS OWN PROPERTY? That mentality is the exact reason California has such a bad petty theft and drug problem. I could care less if it was 50 cents worth of gas. If you chose to steal from someone you chose to face the consequences. Period.

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  Ryan

the entire nation has a serious drug/crime problem. this guys mentality and lack of proper brain function is reckless. I very much doubt the thief even had a gun, it would have been sold for drugs a long time ago. this guy discharged his weapon onto public property, recklessly. end of story. if it was a rancher with a 1,000 foot driveway, I wouldn’t have even commented. also I have more respect for the rancher then someone yahoo with a view of the ocean. did you even look at this guys property on Google Earth?

Guest
Guest
Guest
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

Yup. Having a view of the ocean instantly causes a total loss of credibility…

Ryan
Guest
Ryan
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

So you are making excuses for the thief…

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  Ryan

I just watched the video on northcoast news. the victims car was parked on the road and not in his driveway. the entire incident occurred on Public property.

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

you should watch the video of the victim stating what happened. he said he was going to get in his car and start pursuing the suspect, but then decided to use his brain and call the sheriff. that’s after discharging his rifle at the suspect while on someone else’s property, uphill, and towards other residences. I think he is making a portion of it up. watch it for yourself and see what you think.

Rule of Law not Leftists
Guest
Rule of Law not Leftists
5 years ago
Reply to  Ryan

Democrats love criminals. Ask Pelosi she cries for MS-13 and others to have more rights than citizens. Part of the social contact is the right to protect life, liberty, and property of oneself and others. Throughout modern history it’s the government thugs with a uniform killing others as the guardians of the system which doesn’t want armed victims. WTF don’t boot licking government worshippers not get about that?

Criminals Rights ???
Guest
Criminals Rights ???
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

Hey, local observer,

Walk a mile in my shoes. When you have one of these criminals give you a TBI (brain injury) that causes you to feel like you have dementia most of the time, and your balance is off, it is life changing! Not to mention my screwed up neck and back. Sometimes you don’t get the option to protect yourself. Many times the perpetrator isn’t even brought to justice for their crimes or even caught. They will take your money, property, quality of life, and health. It affects things in your life you can’t even imagine . Could you deal with not being able to get along as well anymore with the people in your life, that you love ? I use to be good with numbers and spelling, not now. On and on.

I can tell you one thing, if I ever get confronted again with a criminal, and see it coming, I won’t be asking if he just needs some money for gas, or what his problem is!!!

I’d have to say waking up almost every day with a headache and not remembering always what you’re suppose to do, also seems to put me in a depressed mood for the day. If you are so worried about the criminals rights, I suggest you partake in talking and helping some victims of these thugs. You might change your tune!!! What is very scary is this happened over a year ago, and I’m still having all these problems.

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago

it seem no one understands that I could give a flying fuck about these criminals. its this simple (if his story is true): this guy went out looking for action, he shot in the direct of someone’s house while being on that someone’s property. what isn’t there to understand. it was reckless and society needs less reckless people. and as far as your shoes go, I got jumped by a gang of 6 or so guys when I was 17. i have a laundry list of problems from that. he should have just called the sheriff. after watching the video 3 times i don’t even believe his story. when you go out looking for trouble you will find it. i have a locking gas cap to remove this potential problem from all the other problems that will occur on an average day.

Mike
Guest
Mike
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

In California if someone is armed and robbing you the only acceptable course of action is to run into your house, hide in the closet, call the police (who won’t show up) and suck on your thumb while you hope karma will save you because you bring your own grocery bags to the store. That’s why we need to do away with toxic masculinity so we can have the courage to hide and cry.

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  Mike

or just think clearly. this guy was walking away and based on the length of the driveway may have been on public property at the time of the shooting. at 5:30 am during rockfish season I could have been a victim driving by to the launch. its important to think past your pride.

Willie caos- mayhem
Guest
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

🕯Common sense does not seem to abode in some of these individuals.

THC
Guest
THC
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

So if the police respond to a bank robbery and the robber is done committing the crime and walking away, they should just let him go, even if he brandishes a weapon at them? Wow

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  THC

so you are saying this guy is a highly trained law enforcement officer. you might want to read the CA law for citizens arrest. plus aren’t you like 30.

Guest
Guest
Guest
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

Too much time spent on the internet and watching TV corrupts thinking. It helps to remember long enough to notice the last time it was insinuated the police were incompetent.

Canyon oak
Guest
Canyon oak
5 years ago
Reply to  Mike

Right!
Perfect,
Poor misunderstood thieves need a public forum on K.H.S.U. to instruct us on how profound their life stories are, and how we are all privileged oppressors!
Well, let’s just trap them with their own “intersectional”
gibberish.
Poor misunderstood gas theif.
He just wanted to learn to play piano like the rest of us..

Dan F
Guest
Dan F
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

The suspect then reportedly brandished a firearm at the victim, at which time the victim fired one shot at the suspect.

shak
Guest
shak
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

Dyslexic summary of what really happened?
“The suspect reportedly began to walk away when the victim demanded that he stop. The suspect then reportedly brandished a firearm at the victim, at which time the victim fired one shot at the suspect.”
He walked away, then brandished. Not the opposite like you picture.
It’s easy to mix up the visual, we all do it.

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  shak

“The victim, armed with a firearm, confronted the suspect. The suspect reportedly began to walk away when the victim demanded that he stop. The suspect then reportedly brandished a firearm at the victim, at which time the victim fired one shot at the suspect.”
so you think the victim approached the suspect with the gun concealed? we don’t all do it, but I do see it often with trump supporters and of course FOX news.

shak
Guest
shak
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

That part of it was part of the citizen’s right to make a citizen’s arrest.
The part that you’re unwittingly? ignoring is the part where he didn’t fire a shot until AFTER the criminal threatened him.

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  shak

he broke the law, its black and white.
“it would not be reasonable force to shoot or otherwise seriously harm someone who flees after being placed under citizen’s arrest.”

Mike
Guest
Mike
5 years ago
Reply to  local observer

never fails there’s always a liberal defending the criminal. He could of fell through the victims skylight and cut himself on a knife on the table in the fall and you would be crying about how knifes should be kept in safes when not being used. Every single time. It’s as predictable as you insulting trump supporters

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  Mike

the solution in the early 80s on the east coast was not vigilantism, that was an other problem on top of the main problem. the solution was “no Loitering” and “stop and frisk”. I am assume this guy was parked at the overlook which could have a sign stating “no parking or Loitering between 10pm – 6am”, which allows the local PD to stop, search, and frisk anyone parked there during that time frame.

Guest
Guest
Guest
5 years ago
Reply to  Mike

Hmm… that’s what Trump said in September 2016 – “During the debate, Trump spoke about the need for “law and order” and pointed to New York City’s stop-and-frisk program as an example of policing programs that could be adopted by other cities. It was after this that Holt noted that the city’s stop-and-frisk program was found to be unconstitutional.”

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/09/is-stop-and-frisk-unconstitutional/

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  Mike

its fine when connected to no loitering because at that point the loiterer is breaking the posted law. randomly stopping and frisking based on profiling is unconstitutional.

Guest
Guest
Guest
5 years ago
Reply to  Mike

So there was a no loitering sign in this man’s driveway? On the public street in front of his house? Or even better a universal no loitering sign covering everyone ebpverywhere?

Willie caos- mayhem
Guest
5 years ago
Reply to  shak

🕯The criminal really didn’t threaten him until the victim scared him by hollering at that,might have startled him into pulling his gun. I admit he was up to no good and that’s why he was startled.

Ryan
Guest
Ryan
5 years ago

Quit giving the criminals a free pass willie. The homeowner did what he felt was right to defend his property and life from an armed thief.

hmm
Guest
hmm
5 years ago

But being startled is not legal or moral grounds for the theif to brandish a firearm. Whereas the victim was right to demand the theif stop.

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  hmm

did you see the video?

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  hmm

he shot at the suspect on someone else’s property according to his statement in the video. nothing was on his property and I doubt based on his van that he is a property owner on that road. and how do you get chased up a driveway away from your car, get shot at, but make it back to your car in the direct of the guy with the rifle shooting at you. his story is full of holes.

Guest
Guest
Guest
5 years ago

First you condemn the person who shot at a gas thief for owning too much property. Now you condemn him for not owning any property at all. It would be better to stop trying to prove a first impulsive remark is right. Frankly at this point having been right would be a sheer accident anyway.

local observer
Guest
local observer
5 years ago
Reply to  Guest

there is no one in this neighborhood that has too much property. most don’t even have yards. i didn’t even say anything about the size of his property. until i watch the video i assume it was all on his property except the disposition of the bullet. after watching the video you find he wasn’t even on his property, whether he owns it or rents it or is couch surfing. it doesn’t matter.

Dan F
Guest
Dan F
5 years ago

Gun Control, is hitting what you’re aiming at!!!

Sparkelmahn
Guest
Sparkelmahn
5 years ago
Reply to  Dan F

Best definition ever. Hope you don’t mind if I borrow it. Thanks!

C'mon elections
Guest
C'mon elections
5 years ago

As Gavin and his underlings siphon the money out of the population these daily incidents of theivery will only get worse! !!!! They leave us (the population)to stand up for ourselves as they steal all the money.the master plan of greedy evil!!!! We are the 99%%%%%%

Willie Caso-Mayhem
Guest
5 years ago

🕯👍🏾⛾

Guest
Guest
Guest
5 years ago

“Legally justified in defense of self. He had a right to make a private party arrest for theft and the subsequent right to defend himself while making it. Hope he hit the asshole though it sounds like he didn’t.”

Guest
Guest
Guest
5 years ago
Reply to  Guest

Sounds like he didn’t want to hit the thief. Just scare him.

festus haggins
Guest
festus haggins
5 years ago

I vote for more gun control, if there were more gun control the victim could have scored 10 for 10 on the suspect ( only 10 for 10 because of the Kommifornia law that neuters us to 10 round capacity .)

Dan F
Guest
Dan F
5 years ago
Reply to  festus haggins

As I said earlier “Gun Control” is hitting what you were aiming at!!! Nothing more Nothing Less!!!!

Willie caos- mayhem
Guest
5 years ago
Reply to  Dan F

🕯Only if you have limp wrist.

The victim was right
Guest
The victim was right
5 years ago

The victim was right.

Criminals are unpredictable.

Hope they catch the criminal and put him away.

Kudos to the victim.

Hick
Guest
Hick
5 years ago

The Victim,He or she doesn’t really sound like a victim.

Tax paying citizen
Guest
Tax paying citizen
5 years ago

I personally don’t want to live in a world where I have to “HIDE AND CRY”

Redwood stump
Guest
Redwood stump
5 years ago

This is bullshit I saw this on the news tonight this punks a tweek. So surprised he’s taken seriously when he should be arrested.

THC
Guest
THC
5 years ago

And this is a prime example why I will be voting Democrat next president election. Instead of having the right to defend your own property, the situation would have been much better handled if the victim had a legal responsibility to give the suspect 70% of his gas, even if the 30% of the gas left to the victim wasn’t enough to get him back to his job to earn more money to buy gas to give to the suspect. Obviously the suspects is just not willing to work and should be compensated for it. I don’t foresee this to be a problem for long because within the next fee year’s we will have to ban all cars, planes and farting cows otherwise the world will end.

Central HumCo
Guest
5 years ago
Reply to  THC

~slavery imposed through energy.

“CO2 levels have been much higher than currently over the millennia. The Global Warming crowd has an agenda and the core of that is to reduce the population. They remain influenced by the Malthus theory and have been hell-bent on stopping population growth.

Over the past 100 million years, we have been in a decline in CO2 level dropping from 500 ppm to 200 ppm with an average of about 300 ppm. They refuse to address any of the historical evidence no less the cycle of life itself.

Humans exhale typically consists of 40,000 ppm to even 50,000 ppm of CO2. Should we be fined or extinguished because we are a major contributor to COs levels? Those who are demonizing CO2 as a “pollutant” fail to explain that in a room filled with people CO2 levels can commonly reach 2000 ppm with no apparent ill effects. Even the US Navy sets its limit for CO2 in submarines at 5000 ppm to avoid any measurable effect on sailors. NASA also sets similar limits for humans in spacecraft at the same basic level. So obviously, 300 ppm is not dangerous.”

If you measure CO2 level where crops are growing or in a rain forest, they drop drastically because the plants suck it up for that is what they thrive on to live. If you want to lower CO2, then plant more crops and trees.”
https://www.sgtreport.com/articles/2018/2/20/climate-change-conspiracy-against-us-all

hmm
Guest
hmm
5 years ago
Reply to  Central HumCo

Yes CO2 level have been much higher in the past. This is very much like saying that lava isnt dangerous because at one time the entire Earth was molten hot. The last time CO2 level were this high, our species did not yet exist!

Changes in CO2 level are only part of the problem. The rate of change is the biggest and most immediate aspect of the problem. Also, when CO2 levels were higher in the past, solar levels were also lower. The combined effect of sun and CO2 matches well with climate. Historical climate and biological evidence support the hypothesis of anthropocentric climate change. Within a trend line there are often many fluctuations. A 100 million year trend can be deceiving if we fails to look at time scales with that period and fail to understand how they correlate to climate changes.

The CO2 that we exhale is part of the CO2 cycle and is used by plants. Each person contributes about 0.9 kilograms of carbon dioxide per day. Thats only 105,091 kilograms of carbon dioxide for per year, in the USA (0.1034 killotones). Whereas we (USA) produce 5,172,336 KiloTONS from fossil fuels and cement manufacturing alone.

https://www.globe.gov/explore-science/scientists-blog/archived-posts/sciblog/index.html_p=183.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ah09gPZDymg

As far as CO2 toxicity, a substance does not need to be toxic in order to be considered a pollutant. CO2 toxicity depends not only on concentration but also length of exposure.

Planting more trees (or even better stopping deforestation) can help some but it cannot offset our current output. Planting more crops would only make CO2 levels worse due to the release caused by land conversion and modern farming practices.

You need basic education in mathematics, statistics and reasoning.

Central HumCo
Guest
5 years ago
Reply to  hmm

~we’re in a predicament.

Somebody
Guest
Somebody
5 years ago

The only problem is he didn’t hit his target in his cranium victim needs some practice I guess but glad the victim wasn’t injured

Silverlining
Guest
Silverlining
5 years ago

Someone at LoCO pointed out the victim could have been trying to make a citizens arrest and fired into the ground then thought about the legal implications and had to invent the other gun.
Pure speculation but so is everything else here.
I assume the gas can and tubing were left on the scene but the story doesn’t specify that.

Somebody
Guest
Somebody
5 years ago

I agree he probably wasn’t aiming at the person still wish he would of got him though sad what this county is becoming lived her my whole life never more disappointed in this place but still a beautiful place and still a lot of great people here