Police: No charges expected in self-defense shooting death

No charges are expected to be filed against a man who fatally shot an intruder trying to force his way into his residence late Saturday, Baton Rouge police said Tuesday.

The resident, Kurt Anderson, exchanged gunfire with Anthony Taylor, a 20-year-old man who tried to break into the home at 3875 Topeka St., police said.

Police Lt. Don Kelly said Anderson had not been expecting anyone late Saturday night and armed himself with a handgun before opening the door for Taylor.

Taylor, the only person struck in the exchange of gunfire, ran and collapsed a short distance away, Kelly said.

Officers responding to reports of shots fired at 11:45 p.m. found Taylor’s body near Geronimo and Mohican streets, police have said. Taylor’s gun was located next to him, police said.

“Neither Anderson nor any of the other occupants of the home, including a 2-year-old child, were injured,” Kelly said in a news release. “At this time, no charges are anticipated against Anderson as the shooting appears to have been justifiable under law as self-defense. However, the case will be forwarded to the District Attorney’s Office for review.”

Louisiana law states the use of force or violence is justifiable “when committed for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or a forcible offense or trespass against property in a person’s lawful possession” as long as it is “reasonable and apparently necessary” to prevent such an offense.

The law says a person “not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shall have no duty to retreat before using force or violence ...”

“You don’t have to run from an intruder,” East Baton Rouge Parish District Attorney Hillar Moore III said Tuesday.

Anderson, 35, could not be reached for comment Tuesday.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (13)


1) Comment by foldgers - 27/02/2013

OK DMJ, so question, how does knowing where it came from prevent this crime from happening? If it was originally bought legally 10 years ago from Jim's Firearms, then sold to a friend, who had his home broken into and had the gun stolen by this criminal who then used it in this crime, how would that have prevented this man from having it, let alone using it in this crime? And I don't care if an intruder has a gun or not, he breaks into my home for any reason, I will be glad to show him his first mistake was breaking into my home with my children in the other room with my gun. What if he was a 250 pound juice head and unarmed, along with me being unarmed? I would still have no chance and most likely end up in the hospital...

2) Comment by DMJ - 27/02/2013

"And yes DMJ, the intruder did have a gun. Illegally I would imagine." Probably. But HOW and WHEN did it become illegal? Every gun was legal at some point. If the intruder didn't have a gun, then the resident wouldn't have needed one either. And here's the crux of the problem. And let's not forget about another story in the news recently involving a 2 year old and a gun inside the home...

3) Comment by foldgers - 27/02/2013

Trust me, I am all good with shooting an intruder, but I do have to ask, just like tea-slayer, why did he answer the door? Was the guy knocking? Or trying to break in? If trying to break in, then just stand there aiming your gun at the door, if he gets in, then shoot...shoot every bullet in your 30 round mag if you have one, but why answer the door? If I heard someone trying to "break in," I would grab my gun FIRST, stand right there in sight of the door or area where he is trying to break in, and call the police. Then aim my gun directly to the area he was attempting to break and wait. Wait for the cops or wait for the intruder to get in. Seems weird to just open the door, especially with a 2 year old in there. There could have been multiple people outside waiting to come in also. And yes DMJ, the intruder did have a gun. Illegally I would imagine.

4) Comment by Hello Baton Rouge - 27/02/2013

BR Yankee regardless of whether he's protecting dope or his 2 year old child, this incident proves that you have the right to protect your home/family by using lethal force without recourse, PERIOD. Drug dealer or not, I commend him for this action.

5) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 27/02/2013

really? why did he answer the door? this is a drug deal gone bad and the only one left standing can spin it any way he wants.

6) Comment by DMJ - 27/02/2013

yes, the homeowner was armed....but so was the intruder. Something to think about...

7) Comment by BRYankee - 27/02/2013

A person not engaging in unlawful activities does not need to retreat and can use force... I guess I didn't realize that protecting your dope house and stash would be protected in those circumstances... Love that a dope dealing thug is being cast as our hero in a battle of Thug v. Thug.

8) Comment by popseal - 27/02/2013

What a wonderful surprise to read a story correctly stating the law and not living down to an anti-gun hit piece !

9) Comment by Bighug - 27/02/2013

Good thing for Kurt Anderson and his family that the anti-gun nuts aren't in charge. Otherwise only the criminal, Taylor, would have had a gun.

10) Comment by Hello Baton Rouge - 26/02/2013

The Advocate deletes what they perceive to be personal attacks, but leave spam messages in articles. Awesome. Also, Hilar Moore should take this guy to dinner for showing his office how its done.

11) Comment by Woody - 26/02/2013

game, set, match! i have no problem with this whatsoever.

12) Comment by Costanza - 26/02/2013

Good. Thank God the homeowner was armed and able to protect his family from this home-invading thug!

13) Comment by wilmettecaudry - 26/02/2013

If you think Willie`s story is incredible..., a month-back father in-law basically recieved a check for $4426 putting in a sixteen hour week an their house and there best friend's half-sister`s neighbour did this for six months and made over $4426 in there spare time on there labtop. applie the guidelines at this site,==== BIT40.COM ====