Connecting You to Your Community
Lodi, California •

Indexes

November 20th, 2009
November 19th, 2009
November 18th, 2009
November 17th, 2009
November 16th, 2009
November 14th, 2009
November 13th, 2009
ADVERTISEMENT

Homeowner shoots, wounds man

Lodi police: Resident thought man was breaking into house

By Layla Bohm
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
Thursday, November 2, 2006 6:42 AM PST

A homeowner shot and wounded a drunken man early Wednesday because she thought he was trying to break into her house in southwest Lodi, police said.

Benjamin Ortega, who turned 21 the same day, was hit twice in the 300 block of Finch Run Drive around 1:45 a.m. and hospitalized with what police said were not life-threatening injuries to the leg and abdomen.

The resident, Noelle Fabrizio, 38, fired a total of four shots with her .380-caliber handgun, Officer Dale Eubanks said.

Police found no damage to the home, but they did find a wet spot on the side fence and believe Ortega had entered her property to urinate, Eubanks said.

It was the second time in less than four months that Ortega was arrested after allegedly urinating in public, and the previous incident resulted in a court order that he not consume alcohol until October 2007.

Tests Wednesday showed he had a blood-alcohol content level of 0.27 percent when he was hospitalized after the shooting, Eubanks said. In comparison, that is more than triple California's legal driving limit.

Ortega was shot with a small handgun that was registered to a friend of Fabrizio's, Eubanks said. Fabrizio was not arrested and the case remains under investigation. Fabrizio said Wednesday night that she shot Ortega to protect her children.

Neighbors were still talking about the shooting hours later, recounting how the generally quiet street of tidy houses had turned into a sea of flashing emergency lights.

"At 1:50, I just jumped out of my bed," said Kim Seibel, who lives next door to Fabrizio. "I heard four booms and then I heard a guy moaning."

Seibel had first thought someone was pounding on her front door, then realized she must have heard gun shots. Before long, medics and police were on scene, tending to the man in Fabrizio's front yard.

An ambulance took Ortega to Lodi Memorial Hospital, where he was listed in fair condition Wednesday, a hospital spokeswoman said.

By 9:30 a.m., the yellow police tape had been removed from Fabrizio's front yard, and her Halloween decorations remained. Orange lights lined the eaves of the cream-colored two-story, three-bedroom house.

Seibel said Fabrizio has two young children.

Police had initially been called at 1:43 a.m. to the 300 block of Almond Drive, where a man said someone was trying to break into his home. As officers were on their way, police dispatchers received a call that someone had been shot on Finch Run Drive, which runs parallel to Almond Drive.

There they found Ortega, who remains hospitalized and has not been arrested, Eubanks said.

Ortega had previous contact with police on July 16, when he was arrested after allegedly urinating in the road, then lunging at an elderly man whose daughter had told Ortega to stop. Robert Ross, 81, recounted how Ortega took off his shirt, cussed, then charged across the street and into Ross' Mason Street yard.

"We tripped, stumbled, fell and I landed on top," Ross said Wednesday.

Ross had served in the U.S. Marine Corps during World War II and used his training to hold Ortega, telling him he'd let the young man up if he agreed to stay out of trouble.

Ortega was arrested, and he pleaded guilty Oct. 19 to misdemeanor elder abuse, according to San Joaquin County Superior Court records. He was sentenced to 45 days in jail with seven days of credit and is scheduled to begin serving that sentence Nov. 16.

Ortega was also placed on probation and ordered not to consume any alcohol for a year. No other court cases were listed for him in San Joaquin County.

A friend of his, Jerald Geer, said Ortega was born and raised in Lodi but doesn't have a permanent home. Geer said he hadn't seen Ortega in at least a couple weeks. He wondered if there would be any arrests, but that remains under investigation.

"(Detectives) are going to put everything together and give it to the District Attorney," Eubanks said.

Gun ownership doesn't necessarily matter, he said, because the gun was registered and no permit is required to keep a gun inside a home. Some factors investigators and prosecutors will consider include whether Fabrizio's life was in "immediate danger," Eubanks added.

Neighbors said Fabrizio had moved in two months earlier, but they knew little else about her. They said she had regular company and one said she is a hair stylist and nail technician.

As late as spring 2005, she had worked at the county's Family Resource and Referral Center, which helps single or needy parents with child care. Fabrizio is no longer employed there.

City records show that Fabrizio purchased the home Aug. 18.

Police are still investigating, and neighbors remain shaken. Wilma Bianchi, who lives across the street from Fabrizio, said Almond Drive had recently been the target of gang graffiti — the stop sign at Stockton Street still bears telltale white paint — and an attempted burglary and shooting don't help.

"It makes me feel like maybe we need to move," she said.

Contact reporter Layla Bohm at layla@lodinews.com.

First published: Thursday, November 2, 2006

Reader Feedback

Lodian wrote on Nov 17, 2006 11:13 AM:

" WY: That is exactly what the imposter wanted to achieve, the halt of the momentum regarding a topic they didn't like. They certainly didn't like the direction this was going. Perhaps the imposter was involved in the shooting. It's really too bad that the LNS/webmaster cannot control this kind of derailment of a blog. The LNS stopped simple gossip on a blog about a "coffee shop" yet let this blog go wildly off track due to these idiots and their childish use of other poster's blog names. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 16, 2006 9:26 AM:

" Alas, we see that the "imposter" is not a paying customer to these archives and probably not the Lodi News Sentinel (Ya hear that LNS/Webmaster?....they do not pay you!) "

Lodian wrote on Nov 15, 2006 9:22 PM:

" WY: I'd try posting in rainbow colors if that would get rid of the annoyance, but they would just "copy" that too. Oh well, I'm not going to let the distracters take us off topic, which was surely the plan. Besides, I am confident that the "normal" people that post here often know exactly which "Lodian" I am. ;-) "

WY wrote on Nov 15, 2006 1:55 PM:

" Oh... nice one! you Lodians chaced everyone off . To the second Lodian... you're mean spirited.Pick a different name! Your BS reminds me of my kids right in the middle of a good movie! Now we lost momentum. that's just perfect! Could one of you type in blue and the other in red? "

Lodian wrote on Nov 15, 2006 10:58 AM:

" Leonard: I wonder what the neighbors think of this whole thing. We know a couple of them, from this story, that are not too thrilled with Noelle's shooting. I would be interested to know if the neighborhood watch meeting has this on the agenda. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 15, 2006 10:19 AM:

" I hope Noelle Fabrizio and this shooting incident are fully investigated...and to the letter. There is an investigation when the police fire their gun, so I hope at the very least Noelle is completely and thoroughly investigated. Maybe she will be prosecuted for her wild outdoor shootings in the middle of the night in a family residential neighborhood. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 15, 2006 10:15 AM:

" It's unfortunate that some posters take away from the topic by trying create problems with specific other posters (ATTENTION WEBMASTER:Please keep people on topic!). I guess "someone" (wonder who?) had a really big problem with my views about Noelle and her wild shooting at strangers outside her home. When is the court date? Anyone know? "

Lodian wrote on Nov 15, 2006 7:54 AM:

" I will, but you are the imposter. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 14, 2006 11:32 PM:

" Lodian imposter: Enjoy yourself. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 14, 2006 3:30 PM:

" I'm just saying, Get Over Yourself! "

Lodian wrote on Nov 14, 2006 3:30 PM:

" "You are very petty, childish, and low class." (Whatever!) It takes one to know one. It's funny how you will still stoop to the level of namecalling yourself. And who are you calling an imposter? I've posted with the name "Lodian" for the last 6 months, just not everyday like yourself. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 14, 2006 12:22 PM:

" I'll be looking up Noelle Fabrizio's court date. I'd like to see this one. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 14, 2006 12:20 PM:

" Lodian imposter: If you don't like what I have to say or disagree with me, then either state your views like a mature person, or don't read my posts. It's really very simple. Only cowards, like you, attack/stalk others by using their blog name. Do you need help with selecting a blog name? You are very petty, childish and low class. Please re-read this again so you can understand the instructions. Good luck. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 14, 2006 12:13 PM:

" Lodian imposter: Meet me at Noelle's house at about 1:45am. (LOL!) "

Lodian wrote on Nov 14, 2006 12:12 PM:

" Noelle needs some lessons at the shooting range. Almond Drive residents: Be careful out there. Better stay away from Noelle's house. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 13, 2006 8:03 PM:

" I meant yard. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 13, 2006 8:03 PM:

" Lodian, heaven forbid if you and your dog were in someone's dog in the middle of the night. Your big mouth alone would have done you in! "

Lodian wrote on Nov 13, 2006 7:53 PM:

" What are you talking about? Why do you keep using my blog name? "

To Lodian (The Original) ...and imposter wrote on Nov 13, 2006 6:54 PM:

" Are you enjoying your little game? Are the voices in your head telling you what to do? --Lodian "

WY wrote on Nov 13, 2006 4:25 PM:

" Ralph... We think of them all the time and we never stop. But, this is a good "who dune it"... we surely think of our Vets and Soldiers every day. Every day my heart and prayers go out to our Soldiers. Sometimes, things like this Blog helps get us through the fear of having our loved ones over seas. I never stop thinking of our Soldiers. So do many of these bloggers.God Bless America. "

Lodian (The Original) wrote on Nov 13, 2006 3:38 PM:

" Does anyone seem to notice how "Lodian" addresses a comment to the Webmaster, calling people on here "losers?" She wants to be respected (maybe) but resorts to name calling because she's too immature when somebody doesn't agree with her. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 13, 2006 9:45 AM:

" MHRC: Perhaps you could follow the dialogue before deciding to bash me. My "dog" comment evolved from an earlier post when enchanged in conversation with another poster. Geez, so many people just flying off the handle right and left. LOL! "

Leonard wrote on Nov 13, 2006 7:39 AM:

" MHRC: The Shooter took the law into her own hands and shot someone twice for peeing on her lawn. How is that not vigilantism? "

MHRC wrote on Nov 12, 2006 11:37 PM:

" I find it extremely distasteful that lodian and leonard are equating what she did to shooting a dog for peeing in her yard, she may have screwed up but making her out to be a vigilante is over the line "

Leonard wrote on Nov 12, 2006 6:36 PM:

" Lodian: Noelle would put 2 shots in your dog and four into the neighbor's dinner party. That woman is a loose cannon, so to speak. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 12, 2006 3:11 PM:

" godhelplodi: So, will Noelle shoot my dog since I can't enter her yard to retrieve him? "

Lodian wrote on Nov 12, 2006 3:10 PM:

" webmaster: What's the scoop on the blog name deal? Any help with these losers that love to impersonate others? I know you have their ISP numbers so can we blast them off the blog or what?? LOL! ;-) "

Lodian wrote on Nov 12, 2006 3:06 PM:

" godhelplodi: I guess I must live in a more evolved neighborhood full of intelligent people then as Fido has gotten into many a yard, to undoubtedly visit with K9 neighbors, and no one has ever been shot retrieving the ol' mutt. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 12, 2006 12:42 PM:

" I think I'd like to sit in on this court session. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 12, 2006 12:07 PM:

" Blah Blah Blah, Blah Blah Blah! Everyone is using my blog name. Boo Hoo! I'm going to file a complaint because I can't figure out how to pick a new name! "

godhelplodi wrote on Nov 12, 2006 9:45 AM:

" To Lodian, you should not be in anybody's back yard without their conscent, especially late at night, you could be shot by any home owner, not just Noel. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 11, 2006 11:18 PM:

" "internet junkies" ???? How dare she! LOL! "

Leonard wrote on Nov 11, 2006 3:19 PM:

" I wonder whether it was Frankie's gun that was used to shoot the Urinator. "

Re-post by Noelle (roommate) wrote on Nov 11, 2006 1:30 PM:

" From the Stockton Record blogs(wonder why she didn't post on the Lodi blog):"I will make this short and sweet, My name is Frankie Lopez and my nationality happens to be Hispanic.I am Noelle's roommate,who happened to be here on the night of the shooting and will shed light on all the allegations,hearsay and comments IN COURT!! You have all been influenced via the media and internet junkies who have nothing better to do except asssume the events of October31st on our property. Good night.(Edited 3:27 AM by Recordnet) "

Lodian wrote on Nov 10, 2006 11:21 PM:

" My point in all of this has always been safety.Would it have been alright for Noelle to have shot me if I went into her side/back-yard late at night?I'm just seeing this as if it were me in the yard or some other innocent person. Our beloved dog,Fido(the-wonder-dog),has a bad habit of getting away from us.If he were to venture over to Noelle's house,should I call her and tell her we need to fetch Fido?Most folks wouldn't enjoy a call that late. What would you do?And please,don't say that you wouldn't find yourself in this situation.It happens. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 10, 2006 11:09 PM:

" ralph: Did I miss a comment here somewhere (quite possible)? Did someone say something bad about our soldiers in Iraq? "

S&W 500 wrote on Nov 10, 2006 6:26 PM:

" Buy a bigger gun! If you are prosecuted people will come out of the woodwork to support you! To the liberal democrats, did she violate his civil rights? He is a turd. Turds should be flushed down the toilet. Stay off of people's property, don't steal, don't rape, don't perform incest, and do not use our government as a way to supplement your income (food stamps), and we will get along a lot better. "

ralph wrote on Nov 10, 2006 4:21 PM:

" why are lodi people getting so worked up soldiers are dieing each day in Iraq but no one even acknowledges there deaths. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 10, 2006 2:41 PM:

" Lodian: Nah, it's all smoke and mirrors..heh... :) "

Lodian wrote on Nov 10, 2006 1:03 PM:

" Aimee: That's funny! I see you as getting your nose outta joint a lot! LOL! :-) Post on... o calm one. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 10, 2006 1:01 PM:

" It's so annoying when posters want everyone to stop posting and move on from a topic. If you want to move on then please, by all means, do so. Stop asking us all to do the same acting as if we are idiots, drooling on the computer desperately looking for entertainment for discussing an article in the paper. If you are leaving...bye bye! If you have an opinion....post on! "

Mom wrote on Nov 10, 2006 8:59 AM:

" Well the bottom line is, we can go on posting our personal opinion about this situation, reaching 1,000 posts, and getting nowhere. Or, we can all move on now and just let the authorities deal with this. I'm sure we all have a life.....Enjoy the weekend everyone!!! "

Aimee wrote on Nov 9, 2006 8:53 PM:

" I do have a question for all of the dissenters out there: do any of you have any background or training in law? There have been a lot of "the law is/says..." comments floating around, so I was curious. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 9, 2006 8:51 PM:

" Lodian: Unlike other persons on here, I don't get my nose out of joint when someone doesn't share my POV or opinion. This may be some bloggers' only form of entertainment and social interaction and the goings-on here may concern them greatly, but I really just consider this to be a minor diversion and don't really get too excited when someone doesn't share my same ideas. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 9, 2006 8:42 PM:

" No, we don't agree. I only said that there is no right to shoot where the "only provocation" is trespassing. You don't know all of the facts and neither do I. Neither of us know what happened that night because we aren't Noelle. Don't get so excited, I don't agree with you on anything else other than what I mentioned above. "

cmd wrote on Nov 9, 2006 12:05 PM:

" i love the word smarmy. i use it to tease my boy friend from time to time :o) "

cmd wrote on Nov 9, 2006 12:04 PM:

" lodian: exactly... it appears she went out expecting to confront the guy rathter than being in fear for her life. many states require that you retreat (as mentioned before). although not required here, it points to the fact that she was not scared for her life enought to refrain from going out there . . . if she knew he was out there and went out anyways, rather than locking the door. please re-read my previous posts if you thought i was saying otherwise. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 9, 2006 11:29 AM:

" WY: Ya got that right! Party on... "

Lodian wrote on Nov 9, 2006 11:27 AM:

" CMD: How can you be "in fear for your life" if you go outside looking for the guy so as to load him with lead? "

WY wrote on Nov 9, 2006 9:36 AM:

" LOL... This is like Knotts Landing!!! What the hell does Smarmy mean? I am a beauty school drop out and i speak one only American, Smarmy? What a good read,I have laughed all the way through this! We really need to learn from this. Lodian.. I have partied with you in another life. You have to be a friend of mine...lol And Leonard, I can't believe it... I don't have to post "

CMD wrote on Nov 9, 2006 9:25 AM:

" Zoro: there are two types of law: laws on the books, i.e. statutes, ordinances and the like, & laws that are termed "judge made" laws. rules are pulled out of cases and become law. "

CMD wrote on Nov 9, 2006 9:25 AM:

" cont... just because there is not a statute that says that it is illegal to shoot an unarmed man that is tresspassing, does not mean that it is not a law. situations vary, this guy could be 100 lbs and this woman could be 250 lbs and 6 feet tall. this guy could also be 300 and 6'5", unarmed and threatening her. if she is reasonably in fear for her life, then she can shoot... but in this situation, that does not appear to be the case. "

Looks like Noelle has been in Stockton... wrote on Nov 9, 2006 8:19 AM:

" Is she now the trespasser shooter? Did that Stockton girl trespass on someone's lawn to pee? "

Leonard wrote on Nov 9, 2006 5:09 AM:

" From today's Record: "Residents on Plantation Place in north Stockton said the girl was visiting a friend and was among several people standing outside at 5:30 p.m. when a group of four or five men seen in the neighborhood earlier began firing at a fleeing car. About 100 yards separated the place where the girl was hit and the spot where police marked out seven .38-caliber shell casings." "

Leonard-o wrote on Nov 9, 2006 4:49 AM:

" Good Lord! All of that just to find out that the woman agrees with me! "

Leonard-o wrote on Nov 9, 2006 4:43 AM:

" Amy: So after all this bluster and verbage, do we agree that, BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW NOW, there is no evidence that the Shooter had the right to shoot the Urinator? "

Lodian wrote on Nov 8, 2006 10:43 PM:

" aimee: Wow, so many posts. So much to say. You're on a roll. Do you know Noelle Fabrizio or are you just irritated that other bloggers have a point and you don't like it? LOL! A little too "smarmy"? :-) "

Lodian wrote on Nov 8, 2006 10:36 PM:

" aimee: Sometimes a very intelligent person, such as a law professor, can have almost no common sense. So, don't be too flattered. Let me ask you a question. Would you go outside, walking out of your home, looking for an intruder to shoot? You probably won't answer my question as you haven't answered the last one yet. Oh well, I'll try to survive without your response. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 6:24 PM:

" I have no idea who Zoro is, but I am impressed with both his and "A Reader" posts since they show more than a rudimentary knowledge of the law. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 6:23 PM:

" "Aimee is Bilingual": I am "barely intelligent" yet I sound like a law professor? Okaaay... You DO know that these two statements directly contradict each other? But I won't take offense..thanks for the compliment..law professors are very smart individuals. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 6:17 PM:

" But that's not the case, Leo, is it? There are ambiguities and uncertainties as to whether or not trespass was the "only provocation" or more. So, with this in mind (are you still with me?) my discussion of whether deadly force is appropriate when a person is trespassing is indeed relevant..because of the facts of this particular case, they are relevant. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 6:13 PM:

" If he was doing something really bad, like trying to rape her (no evidence of this) or trying to knife her (again, he was unarmed according to the article), then we wouldn't be arguing abou this, would we? We'd find something else to argue about because that's what we do on here: argue the issue over and over again until even I am sick of it. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 6:11 PM:

" Now, bear with me, because this is where you might get lost...the issue in this case, indeed, on this blog, is whether or not Noelle had the privilege to shoot the trespassor. That's what we've all been discussing, isn't it?--whether Noelle should have shot the man in her yard and whether she should be charged with a crime for doing so. Did she have a right to shoot him? "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 6:09 PM:

" You have now qualified your earlier statements with the two words, "only provocation". In that case, yes, if that was the only thing that the attacker was doing, trespassing, and nothing more, a person can't just get out a gun and shoot them for being a trespassor. But is that the case here? Is Ortega simply a trespassor or did he do more? "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 6:07 PM:

" Leonard-o: In all of your earlier posts you stated that it is a crime to shoot an unarmed trespassor. For you, the concern was that responsible gun owners don't go around shooting first and asking questions later. Now, you say; "what I meant was, 'the fact that he is trespassing is your only provacation'. Okay, let's go with that scenario because that little addittion changes the rules a bit. "

MHRC wrote on Nov 8, 2006 3:54 PM:

" noelle has to deal with these consequences and so does bennie other than that all of this bickering over who was right and who was wrong is chicken bleep GET A LIFE PEOPLE "

If you use Aimee's logic... wrote on Nov 8, 2006 12:29 PM:

" Then when the pizza man accidentally comes to my house instead of the other side of my duplex I can shoot him for trespassing. I mean for all I know he could be weilding a large pepperoni. "

Noelle should be in jail. wrote on Nov 8, 2006 11:51 AM:

" http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,227896,00.html Read the link above and see a REAL reason to attack someone and defend yourself. Noelle's is child's play in comparison. Noelle you should be ASHAMED OF YOURSELF. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 8, 2006 11:11 AM:

" Aimee: If you shoot a trespasser who is trying to assualt you, it is a good shooting solely on the grounds of the attempted assualt. With regards to the use of deadly force, the fact that he was trespassing is irrelevant. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 8, 2006 11:09 AM:

" So, am I the only one who gets the feeling that Amy and Zoro are the same poster? "

Leonard wrote on Nov 8, 2006 11:08 AM:

" Aim-e: What I said was that it is a crime to shoot an unarmed trespasser if the fact that he is trespassing is your only provocation. I don't know what motivates you to attack strawmen (of your own creation) but I don't think it is helping your case. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 10:51 AM:

" While you are correct in saying that one should not go shooting trespassors whenever one feels like it, you also need to recognize that NOT ALL shootings of trespassors are a crime. Your statements were blanket statements of the law and incorrect. I was simply trying to educate you, nothing more. While you show great knowledge in other subjects, you lack a bit in your knowledge of the law. It's not an insult; the law can be a difficult thing to grasp, even for judges and attorneys. "

Aimee is bilingual... wrote on Nov 8, 2006 10:45 AM:

" Because all I see is her speaking gibberish. I myself don't know what the law is but from her words which are barely intelligent you would think she is a law professor, or thinks she is. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 10:39 AM:

" continued......... 3. You yourself brought up the issue with multiple statements saying unequivocally that it is a crime to shoot an unarmed tresspassor. This is not the case and I wanted you to know WHY it is not "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 10:28 AM:

" Open Letter to Leonard---- Dear Leonard: The stated law is relevant because: 1. Noelle used a gun-a deadly weapon- It was assault when she pulled out the gun and pointed it at the intruder 2. "IF" Noelle had a privilege to use this deadly force, she will have had a valid legal excuse to commit the assault. The DA/police must decide if the facts warrant this "excuse". "

Aimee wrote on Nov 8, 2006 10:22 AM:

" Leonard: The reason I have not responded to your assertion that my recitation of this particular law is not relevant is because I am surprised that you would make this point over and over again. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 8, 2006 4:09 AM:

" Lodian: Not only would the Shooter have had to go into the house and load the pistol, with a child in the house she would have also had to unlock the pistol from whatever child proof storage container she was keeping it in. MAYBE she has one of those push button access boxes for the pistol that isn't even registered in her name, but I doubt it. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 8, 2006 4:05 AM:

" Aim-e: I am still curious to know where you think the other two bullets went. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 8, 2006 4:04 AM:

" Ami: The point that has been made OVER and OVER which you still seem unable to grasp is that there is absolutely no evidence that the law you cite is relevant to this case. "

concerned wrote on Nov 7, 2006 10:28 PM:

" Wasn't there a shooting in this neighborhood recently? I recall that the police were called about a party or two that were getting out of hand and someone was injured. Anyone know about this? "

Lodian wrote on Nov 7, 2006 10:22 PM:

" Noelle Fabrizio put herself at a higher risk by confronting the man outside in the yard rather than staying inside, locking up and loading the gun. She could have confronted a much more dangerous "armed" person that could have made her daughter an orphan. Where's the good judgement in that? We all make mistakes, but this could have been a grave mistake with a loaded gun. Very serious. Perhaps Fabrizio needs to take a hard look at her decision making skills and get the gun out of the house. ??? Just food for thought. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 7, 2006 10:21 PM:

" Also, think about this now.... Fabrizio was outside, talking to a friend, when she got the news from a neighbor that a stranger/man was wandering the streets and going into backyards. When Fabrizio went inside the house to get the gun, and load it, then why did she go back outside to confront the stranger/man/urinator? Looks to me like she wanted to confront the guy. Foolish choice to confront a stranger in the dark. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 7, 2006 10:19 PM:

" The shooter, Noelle Fabrizio, does not have the right to endanger other people/families in the neighborhood by shooting four times at a figure in her dark backyard, which is in town and close to other homes in the development."If" the urinator was coming towards Fabrizio in a threatening manner that prompted her to make the decision to get a gun from inside the house and then go back outside to shoot the guy then why didn't she get more lead in the guy? If he was coming at her he would have been right in front of her. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 7, 2006 9:34 PM:

" Lodian: I was just reciting the applicable law. I, too, will be interested in the outcome of this case. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 7, 2006 9:30 PM:

" P.S. It's "suite" not "suit" "

Aimee wrote on Nov 7, 2006 9:29 PM:

" Leonard: I'm touched that you hold me in such high esteem. Pshaw, I am only just slightly arrogant, and only on the first Tuesday of every month... "

Leonard wrote on Nov 7, 2006 8:50 PM:

" Amy: Where do you think the Shooter's other two bullets went? "

Leonard wrote on Nov 7, 2006 8:43 PM:

" Oh Arrogant One: In any case, the fact remains that neither the Shooter, nor the Dysfunctional Family nor any of the other alleged witnesses to the event have said anything to suggest (or allege, if you will) that the Urinator was attacking the Shooter. Once again, your hypotheticals appear to have very little relevance to the shooting currently under discussion. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 7, 2006 8:39 PM:

" So what gives Noelle Fabrizio the PRIVILEGE to shoot the man in her backyard? What was the "imminent danger" to Fabrizio or another? The man was unarmed and hadn't touched her, so where is the PRIVILEGE? With the facts stated/presented at the current time, I don't see how Fabrizio was justified in the shooting of this man in her backyard. I will be interested to see where this goes after the investigation is completed by the "professionals". The judge may have to decide. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 7, 2006 8:38 PM:

" Aimee: It appears that reading comprehension is not your strong suit. I never contested the Shooter's right to defend herself IF she was being threatened. What I did say is that you cannot shoot someone merely because they are trespassing. Why don't you try reading the posts before you comment on them, of Arrogant One? "

Aimee wrote on Nov 7, 2006 7:36 PM:

" cont.: your disussion of assault with a deadly weapon is flawed in that it fails to recognize that Noelle 'MAY' be 'EXCUSED' from criminal prosecution for the use of a deadly weapon 'IF' the facts suggest that she had 'PRIVILEGE' for using the deadly weapon against her 'ALLEGED' attacker "

Aimee wrote on Nov 7, 2006 7:27 PM:

" cont.: assault with a deadly weapon is indeed a crime. Using DEADLY force against a trespassor without reasonable justification is against the law..HOWEVER, if the person REASONABLY believes that there is imminent danger to themselves or another (and not to personal property where deadly force is NEVER excused) there is a PRIVILEGE extended to them that allows that person to use deadly force, which could be an assault with a deadly weapon. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 7, 2006 7:23 PM:

" Leonard: I laugh at your feeble attempt to analyze the law. If you knew anything about the law (and you know very little), there is an exception to the penal code you woefully attempted to assert...it's called PRIVILEGE. Shall I explain, oh, limited one? "

Aimee wrote on Nov 7, 2006 7:20 PM:

" Zoro: Leonard will not admit that he is wrong, no matter what. Leonard should stick to the things he knows best, and let me tell you, the law isn't one of those things. "

Bernardo to Zoro wrote on Nov 7, 2006 7:02 PM:

" It is good to see you admit your mistake like a man. "

Zoro wrote on Nov 7, 2006 5:03 PM:

" CMD. My problem with the other person is that he said there is a law that says if you shoot an unarmed man for trespassing on your property, you are, in fact, committing a crime. There is no specific law that says this. I was just trying to get this across to him so he wouldn't be giving out wrong information. I am well aware of deadly force laws.. Thanks...... "

Leonard wrote on Nov 7, 2006 4:42 PM:

" JD: Well, at 1:43 AM he was down the street causing trouble and at 1:45 he was being shot. I don't know how fast you can urinate but the times make me think he was caught in the act. If you believe... the Shooter put two bullets in the Urinator (and two God knows where) because he wouldn't "back up". In any case, none of the individuals who claim to have witnessed the event have claimed that the Urinator was threatening the Shooter in any manner. "

JD wrote on Nov 7, 2006 3:52 PM:

" Leonard--I didn't catch it from the article--was he definitely in the act of urinating when she shot him? If not, how do we know if he was standing still? "

Weezer wrote on Nov 7, 2006 3:16 PM:

" When is the use of deadly force necessary? Have gun, will shoot? Responsible gun ownership is the key. Otherwise, people would stupidly act like vigilantes a la Charles Bronson. "

"long time resident" writes... wrote on Nov 7, 2006 12:48 PM:

" (continued)...There were at least 4 shots(I thought I heard 5) and only 2 hit Mr. Ortega. That means at least 2 bullets flying around our yards. Remember, this was OUTSIDE. This person was not in her home! If she feared for her children, keep your doors locked and call 911! Shoot ONly if he tried to enter your home Stop shooting bullets toward MY family!!!!! "

re-post, As a long time resident wrote on Nov 7, 2006 12:47 PM:

" ...of the neighborhood,noelle,moved into two-months ago,we have always enjoyed a quiet cooperative neighborhood.The few times any of us has had to call police,they arrived extremely quickly and were always very professional.On one occasion a LPD officer knocked on our door because we had a ladder leaned against our house and he wanted to make sure it was not used to burglarize us. We awoke to gun shots two nights ago.Good thing it wasn't summer as our children like to camp out in the backard.This had never been a concern as everyone in our neighborhood is responsible and their children do-similar-activities.(continued).... "

CMD wrote on Nov 7, 2006 12:25 PM:

" ZERO: Check out People v. Ceballos If you are treatened with deadly force, you can always use deadly force back. You can use non-deadly force (gun = deadly force) to protect your property, but NOT deadly force to protect property. Death/deadly force is different. cont... "

CMD wrote on Nov 7, 2006 12:24 PM:

" cont... When it comes to a dwelling (inside your house) that is different. You do not have to retreat... ie can protect your house because you are in the dwelling. You cannot set a spring gun though to shoot people that enter. Here the guy was not inside her house. From what has been said so far, does not sound like he was armed, that she thought he was armed and so on. California Law limits the use of deadly force (using a gun) to: 1)forcible entry is used or 2) there is REASONABLE fear of GREAT bodily harm. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 7, 2006 12:01 PM:

" That should have read more like, "Can a person "shoot" outside of their home with a gun that is not registered to them personally?" "

Leonard wrote on Nov 7, 2006 11:39 AM:

" Zero: In any case, I stand by my original statement. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 7, 2006 11:37 AM:

" Zero: Is it your contention that it is legal to shoot an unarmed man for no other reason than that he is trespassing on your land or are you simply trying to create confusion? "

Lodian wrote on Nov 7, 2006 10:31 AM:

" Can a person be outside of their home with a gun that is not registered to them personally? "

To Stephanie... wrote on Nov 7, 2006 9:09 AM:

" Maybe your kids should be doing their homework instead of blogging on an adult site since they can't seem to correctly write the word "you're" which stands for you are. Seems the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree though by your rantings and misspellings. "

Zoro wrote on Nov 7, 2006 8:21 AM:

" Leonard, on Nov. 2 at 3:51 PM you wrote,"The LAW says that if you shoot an unarmed man for trespassing on your property, you are, in fact, comitting a crime." I just asked you what law that was, no more. There is NO law that says this. Get your facts straight. An anyone who uses the word "PERPS" is watching to many cop shows. Bernardo, no comment... "

Good Ridance to Stephanie wrote on Nov 7, 2006 7:53 AM:

" and her illiterate children. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 7, 2006 7:41 AM:

" Stephanie: You said, "my children are doing well because they are far more enlightened at their age than anyone I have read about online"....wow! I guess I should have been more impressed with Nicole's post. "

To Stephanie wrote on Nov 7, 2006 7:36 AM:

" You keep promising to leave but here you are.... "

Lodian wrote on Nov 7, 2006 7:36 AM:

" Does anyone else, that has been on these blogs a long time, see visions of the old poster "Mom" in the new poster "Stephanie"? Not sure if it's the same person, but sure sounds like it. LOL "

Lodian wrote on Nov 7, 2006 7:33 AM:

" Stephanie:Some of us people "in society"(LOL)try to converse on topics on these blogs to the best of our ability and knowledge of the topic as presented to us in the LNS(this is the LNS blog,in case you weren't aware).Too bad you feel defeated after some have disagreed with you and/or put you in your place.That is the way of the world, Stephanie.People will disagree with you.Most adults will come back with a response as to why they stand behind their opinion on any given topic. Most do not whine and sign off with their tail between their legs.Grow up,Stephanie. "

Bernardo to Zoro wrote on Nov 7, 2006 5:37 AM:

" What do you think shooting someone is? At the very least it is attempted homicide. I hope you don't own a gun because you don't seem to understand much about when you can use one. "

Stephanie wrote on Nov 6, 2006 11:21 PM:

" You people who said that I should keep my children off the internet are right. If what I have read is the norm of what type of people who are on here then yeah, my kids are done with this as am I. Seriously, if I was less of a person I would wish what happened onto you, but I'm not. Like I said before, it must be really nice to be so educated, enlightened, and all knowing to be able to judge people so easily. "

Stephanie wrote on Nov 6, 2006 11:15 PM:

" Oh my goodness!!! This will be my final post. I am absolutely floored as to how ignorant you people in society are. Of all of the things that I have posted all that has been done is name calling and unfounded critisism. I honestly feel and know that I am a GREAT mom and I KNOW that my children are doing well because they are far more enlightened at their age than anyone I have read about online. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 10:13 PM:

" Red: You know, where I come from (here) being a redneck is not necessarily the same thing as being an idiot. I think a lot of people might be offended by your attempts to link the two. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 10:10 PM:

" Red: IF my wife or daughter were at risk, I would not hesitate to shoot. If they were not at risk, I would wait for the police. The key question here (which appears to be just a little bit too subtle for you) is whether there is a risk. As I said before (do you guys ever actually read?) if someone was peeing on my lawn, I would turn on the sprinklers. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 10:04 PM:

" Zero: As I said, I stand by my earlier statement. You can taunt me all you want, the fact remains that I am right and you are wrong. Face the facts and quit your whining, "

Zoro wrote on Nov 6, 2006 9:20 PM:

" Leonard, try again. 197 and 198 are definitions for justifiable homicide. They are not even chargeable sections. Show me the section that says it is against the law to shoot a trespasser as you specifically said. Hint -section 602 is for trespassing. Or just admit you were wrong. "

You know you're a redneck when..... wrote on Nov 6, 2006 7:44 PM:

" Here's the real truth. If some drunk guy was on Leonard's property in the middle of the night and his wife and baby were at risk, he wouldn't have the balls to shoot the guy! Instead he'd wait for Lodi P.D to show up, but by that time it would be too late! Dee Dee Dee! I rest my case. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 6, 2006 6:46 PM:

" Hopefully, Noelle will at the very least, take a class on how to handle and shoot the gun she owns (well, the friend's gun that she keeps in her home). Hopefully she doesn't keep it loaded in the home with small children. I fear that this woman, Noelle, is not a responsible gun owner. Maybe she has learned a few things this past few days. "

sam wrote on Nov 6, 2006 6:02 PM:

" nylodian, sorry for my ignorance... I just got your name.. a New Yorker from Lodi. Wow, so glad you blog. My daughter lives in SF and loves to blog regularly too. Thanks for your input. On shooting intruders... I was told by the sheriff after my last robbery to shoot to kill. I live in county and "innocent" trespassers wandering into my fenced yard in a vineyard are not that innocent. I do not know Lodi's city codes, but I will shoot to kill any 1:30 am trespassers. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 5:30 PM:

" Zord: I stand by my earlier statement. Under California Law, trespassing in someones yard does not justify the use of deadly force. As for the penal code, I would suggest that you read section 197.2 and then consider it in the context of Section 198. "

Zoro wrote on Nov 6, 2006 4:33 PM:

" Leonard. Still waiting for the PC section in regards to trespassing. You can't be believeable when you are caught in a lie. You have gone after everyone else on here but won't answer my question. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 4:25 PM:

" Lodian: I agree 100% Stephanie and Nicolle are very lucky that the Shooter didn't either mistaked them for Urinators or hit them with stray rounds. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 4:24 PM:

" Stephanie: I was simply responding to the part of your post that was directed at me and which concerned spelling and grammar. With regards to the rest of your message, given the fact that both the Shooter and the Urinator are under investigation, I think we should confine ourselves to the actual facts of the case as reported by the police and leave any self serving comments that either of the suspects may have made out of the mix. "

nylodian wrote on Nov 6, 2006 3:50 PM:

" The resident was charged with manslaughter because none of the 12 or so men who broke in were armed. Luckily, he was later aquitted, but the ordeal took a toll on him. "

nylodian wrote on Nov 6, 2006 3:49 PM:

" Last year here a young man stabbed to death another young man in self-defense when the man (drunk) and a group of his friends (also drunk) mistook his home for a rival frat house and broke down the door and windows. cont.... "

nylodian wrote on Nov 6, 2006 3:45 PM:

" A reader: I'm not sure what you mean about the retreat law, but here in NY, the intruder better be armed and inside your house if you shoot at him or her. (cont) "

Lodian wrote on Nov 6, 2006 3:31 PM:

" FJ: You're correct.This blog is not about Stephanie or her daughter. The fact is that a man was shot.Noelle is lucky she didn't kill him as she may have been brought up on bigger charges than she may face now. Point, one must know what(whom) they are shooting or you may make the biggest mistake of your life.I was taught that if you are going to fire on someone you had better be darn sure you need to shoot him.And if the situation is dire enough to warrant pulling the trigger then you had better shoot to kill,not wound. "

Well maybe Stephanie... wrote on Nov 6, 2006 3:30 PM:

" should watch what her kids do and they won't be getting attacked on the net for their poor spelling and grammar. But I'm sure she'll have an excuse for that too. "

Carl wrote on Nov 6, 2006 3:14 PM:

" FJ is right. This is turning out to be a Stephanie/Nicole bashing. I don’t know why, but I have read the article and all the comments and I can’t say without a shadow of a doubt whether the shooting was justifiable. The only ones that know that are Noelle and Mr. Ortega. I’m sure in time we will all know exactly what happened. Until then, I guess we continue bashing Stephanie and Nicole. "

FJ wrote on Nov 6, 2006 2:54 PM:

" All of a sudden this blog has turned into a “Flame Stephanie and Nicole” thread. That is the risk you take when you decide to post comments online. Right or wrong this thread has lost its focus people. It’s not about Stephanie and Nicole, although they make it easy to keep it coming, it’s about shooting someone to kill him and not knowing the true facts of why this happened. "

A Reader wrote on Nov 6, 2006 2:35 PM:

" The East Coast (US) States have retreat laws, which withold certain self defense rights until the victim has retreated "to the wall". These laws came over from England. The Western States didn't believed you could retreat from a bullet, and never enacted retreat laws. Even in a retreat state such as New York you never had to retreat from your home. Be careful when you come onto a Lodi Resident's grounds. "

Hey Nicole's Neglectful Mom! wrote on Nov 6, 2006 2:30 PM:

" Leonard was right about it being "Noelle's neighbor" not "Noelles neighbor". I see you must be helping your daughter with her homework. LOL "

Lodian wrote on Nov 6, 2006 2:28 PM:

" almond dr resident: I am focused on not shooting someone what may be a benign person entering a yard to pee. This jerk is just that, a jerk. Noelle really didn't know who was out in the backyard in the dark though did she? By Nicole's account, Noelle was running to your house in the front yard with her loaded gun alerting you of this man. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 6, 2006 2:17 PM:

" Stephanie:I wasn't addressing your daughter's grammar.I was addressing the angry,flip and condemning nature of her post.She was commenting on what she believes are facts that have not been presented nor discussed to that point.She was bashing others for not knowing these things and becoming angry about things no one ever posted. She was misreading posts.Yes,we can chalk that up to immaturity,fine.You see,I was reading what she had to say and not how well she could articulate, spell and use proper grammar.I don't have to"school"her as she'll get enough of that in the real world. Well,enough attention to that.Moving-on... "

Lodian wrote on Nov 6, 2006 2:08 PM:

" Stephanie: Perhaps you are right. I probably should have ignored your daughter's comments as conversing with a teen that addresses me as she did does not deserve a response. Also, I am sure you are quite thankful that Noelle did not shoot your daughter instead of the urinator. Nicole(15) did state that the man/urinator was in your yard first and Noelle came to your house with the gun to tell you this information. Good thing Nicole didn't step outside in the dark to see what was going on. "

Nicole's Neglectful Mom cont. wrote on Nov 6, 2006 1:45 PM:

" Because if you read your daughter's posts they make no sense. It is "you're" for you are, not UR. And before you spout of about "internet speak" my kids use the net too but they know how to spell and used correct grammar. Get off the computer and tend to your children. They seem to need it. "

Nicole's Neglectful Mom wrote on Nov 6, 2006 1:44 PM:

" Let me state this slow so maybe you will get it. Nicole is stating she knows the facts of the incident. Well it happened at 1:45 a.m. that is why I said she should be in bed at that time. And maybe if she is up that late she should be studying her English. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 6, 2006 1:11 PM:

" Though I am not convinced that Noelle Fabrizio actually posted that comment here on Nov 1st... Why do Noelle's account of the events that evening differ greatly from what she told the police that night. "

Confused wrote on Nov 6, 2006 1:04 PM:

" So Stephanie, enlighten us. What is the real story? Since you seem to be so close with the shooter, so close she didn’t even have you phone number, tells us what really happened. Show us the light. Educate us. What are we missing? "

Stephanie wrote on Nov 6, 2006 12:57 PM:

" Leonard, I wrote all of that and the only comment you have is to criticize my grammar. Which I don't even think you are right about. Seriously there is something very wrong with you. I don't know your situation, but by my guess I think that a job or maybe some friends might help you out. Maybe you should goto law school and become a lawyer since you seem to have such an interest. "

To Stephanie wrote on Nov 6, 2006 12:50 PM:

" So if you know the real story of what happened, does that mean you were present when the shooting took place? If you weren’t there then you don’t know what really happened. My instinct tells me you don’t have a clue what happened. Go sit down and teach your daughters how to read and write. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 12:45 PM:

" Stephanie: Let she who is without grammatical sin cast the first stone. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 12:42 PM:

" Stephanie: That should be Noelle's (possesive) not Noelles. :) "

Stephanie wrote on Nov 6, 2006 12:16 PM:

" As for Leonard, wow! Talk about someone who needs a spelling and English class, I think that he would be a great candidate for that. Since I know the real story let me say again, THE INTRUDER WAS NEVER URINATING IN THE YARD!!! This is very sad you people need to stop being sheep and believing everything you read from the media. It also must be nice to be so perfect that you feel you can judge people for things so easily. "

Stephanie wrote on Nov 6, 2006 12:12 PM:

" cont.d.... Also to this person that asked why she was up at 1:45am, what would lead you to believe that? None of her post times are even near that. Secondly, to Lodian I have read some of your comments and I would have to say that in some cases it seems that Nicole is far more insightful and educated than you are. Besides what kind of a person are you that you have to school a 15 year old, if that makes you feel more important I guess that's what you need..... "

Stephanie wrote on Nov 6, 2006 12:08 PM:

" I am the mother of Nicole(15) and Crystal(13) and also Noelles neighbor. I would just like to respond to a few of the ridiculous comments I have read on this site. First of all, to all the people who are posting that Nicole's comments don't make any sense or don't relate to the news story that's because she is talking about the actual facts that she knows.... "

tired of pc wrote on Nov 6, 2006 11:46 AM:

" anyone who urinates on someone else's property, is a premeditated animal. he will be back soon and possibly rape or assalt the homeowner. he should be hung in public then gutted like a catfish then released. maybe then he and the rest of the nortenos and suerenos will catch on. if you feel sorry for the pig, take him in your home and reabilitate him. i'm keeping a loaded gun ready. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 11:14 AM:

" Thanks T&C! At this age, it seems like life is nothing more than a never ending series of sniffels. They say that she will grow out of it in a few years. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 11:12 AM:

" Aimee: I would like to know where in this blog I have resorted to "personal insults". From where I am sitting, you are the one throwing terms like "smarmy" about. Why don't you just stick to the facts and leave the petty personal insults out of it? "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 11:07 AM:

" Resident: We are trying to have a civil discourse here. Can you please lay off the personal insults? "

To Nicole (15) wrote on Nov 6, 2006 11:04 AM:

" After reading your post, I had to stop and think. “You are the future of this country”. Let’s try and sound a little intelligent and learn to spell and use proper grammar. Otherwise, just stick with myspace.com "

T & C wrote on Nov 6, 2006 10:10 AM:

" Leonard, sorry to hear your child is ill. Hope it's only a small passing case of virus. Take care of that precious one! I have to agree with your posts, too, Leonard. Firearms aren't toys and a case like this mandates that any firearms in that household are to be confiscated by the proper authorities. Having a loaded firearm in a house with children is also a crime. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 6, 2006 9:24 AM:

" READ, Lodian, READ! "

Lodian wrote on Nov 6, 2006 9:15 AM:

" These blogs are here for public comment,opinion and to converse on ideas and information.I suggest if that is difficult for you to handle then perhaps you shouldn't participate in the blogs.Seriously,some people have a hard time with blogs as they get angry too easily and don't understand comments very well in the written word.I have a relative that can't stand to read or comment on the blogs for this reason. She says she can't stand conversing with someone on important issues without looking them right in the eye.Mannerisms and inflections are necessary to her.I can understand what she means. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 6, 2006 9:04 AM:

" Nicole: Just ignore Lodian. Like Leonard, if they don't like your point of view, they get smarmy and nasty, stooping to personal insults. They just like to show off how liberal and intelligent they can sound. I think it's quite funny, myself. Keep posting if you feel you have something to say. Freedom of speech exists for minors (young people such as yourself)as well. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 6, 2006 9:00 AM:

" Lodian: In response to your comments to me earlier, please note that earlier in this blog, Noelle herself stated that her child was sick that morning. Really Lodian, you should take your own advice to Nicole when you say; "..if you insist on posting responses perhaps you can re-read the posts and try again with a response that shows you understood the comments...". "

To Nicole wrote on Nov 6, 2006 8:17 AM:

" I think you need to spend your time in school in an English class before you post your gibberish on the internet. What were you doing up at 1:45 a.m.? Maybe someone should send CPS to your house to talk with your mom. "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 6, 2006 8:08 AM:

" TO LODIAN, this was not some drunk teen partying. he is someone with a problem that needs help. am i saying that he deserves to be shot no. but he was ordered not to consume alcohol 12 days prior to halloween. he obviously has no respect for the law. maybe now he and others will think twice before entering PRIVATE PROPERTY. and yes your fenced yard is private property. "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 6, 2006 8:07 AM:

" TO LODIAN no your not commenting on the article. all your doing is spewing crap that you in your ignorance believe to be true...im not the one speculating, why dont you go back and read all of my comments. your the one speculating on my neighborhood, on ms fabrizo incompetence with a gun, and mr ortegas intentions and all the what ifs. "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 6, 2006 7:48 AM:

" TO LODIAN why are you so focused on this incident involving a drunk teen.. what if what if what if. if your so worried about all the drunk teens in lodi maybe you should try adressing underage drinking with the city council and the police department or your neighborhood watch. at one point in my life i was an underage drinker who attended parties but let me just say I never entered someones yard to urinate.. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 3:06 AM:

" BFD: Nah... I think I will just go ahead and speak my mind. If you don't like it, don't read my posts. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 6, 2006 3:05 AM:

" JD: Cops aren't usuually shooting at a target that is standing still while it urinates. If a cop had shot the Urinator under these circumstances, they would have lost their badge. "

JD wrote on Nov 5, 2006 10:12 PM:

" Leonard-- I don't know much about guns, but my understanding is that police officers who fire their weapons at criminals have about a 37% hit rate. Noelle had a 50% hit rate. Whether she was justified in firing at all or not I won't say, but I think her marksmanship was pretty decent. "

bfd wrote on Nov 5, 2006 10:09 PM:

" Leonard, go take care of the sick baby and shut up about this. You got nothing else to do with your time? Let's all let this be a Police and DA deal. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 7:44 PM:

" Lodian: Excellent point! Shooting alone is not sufficient. You have to actually hit what you are shooting at. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 5, 2006 5:56 PM:

" almond dr resident: We are commenting on the article written by the LNS. For many reasons we do go by what is stated here by police officers etc as what probably happened rather than a few posters comments on an anonymous blog. Seems to be the right way to go as far as information on the events that took place that night. If you want to speculate fine. Just DON'T expect everyone to swallow it as truth. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 5, 2006 5:52 PM:

" almond.dr.resident:You don't seem to understand.Please read carefully.I'm stating exactly the same thing as you regarding parties.I'm not sure how to make this anymore clear.YES,parties happen everywhere.YES,parties happen in my neighborhood(already stated).YES,parties happen in your neighborhood.POINT,parties happen everywhere and everywhere there are stupid teens running about.And YES sometimes they do stupid things like urinate on fences in all hours of the night.YES they are stupid.NO they shouldn't be shot and possibly killed by gun wielding amateur with a loaded gun!Get it? Geez,does anyone read the entire post or just pluck out a few words that get their hairs up and start-blogging-in-flames???READ-people-READ. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 5, 2006 5:40 PM:

" HappyDays:Noelle Fabrizio didn't know the history,or anything else for that matter,about the urinating man in her yard until AFTER the police arrived.This urinating person in the yard could have been your teenager being stupid after a party in that neighborhood.That's why responsible gun owners know that we don't just shoot in the dark at a man urinating. We ready the weapon and lock the doors while police handle the issue.If police don't arrive in a timely manner,and the man shows signs of harming you or entering your dwelling,then be ready to shoot....and not just flying bullets...I mean shoot the intruder. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 5, 2006 5:29 PM:

" nicole(15): I think you need to come back when you are older or can converse in an intelligent comprehensive manner. You are misreading posts right and left and are not addressing any blog entries with an understanding of what was just communicated to you. If you insist on posting responses perhaps you could re-read the posts and try again with a response that shows you understood the comments. Thanks "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 5:05 PM:

" Wow! My spelling is really off today. My apologies to all. That's what you get for staying up all night with a sick baby. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 2:51 PM:

" Resident: As for the rounds that completely missed their target, where do you think they went? They certainly didn't evaporate at the Shooter's property line. Undoubtedly, in a residential neighborhood, they continued along whatever random trajectory she sent them on until they either hit wood, dirt, metal or flesh. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 2:49 PM:

" Resident: The fact that the Shooter didn't know how to use the gun is evident from the fact that she missed tow of her shots entirely at close range, that she was using jacketd rounds for home defense and that, of the two rounds that did hit, one of them was an effective miss, hitting the Urinator in the leg. All of this with a target that was standing against a fence, peeing. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 2:43 PM:

" Nicolle: As a matter of fact, it IS like the Shooter was shooting randomly into the night. The report says that she put to bullets into the Urinator and sent two bullets off to God know's where. This is either irresponsible gun handeling or poor marksmanship. Either way, you are VERY lucky that one of the Shooter's random bullets didn't go into you or someone you love. You should thank God for your good fortune. "

almonmd dr resident wrote on Nov 5, 2006 2:13 PM:

" it never mentioned wether she had knowledge of how to use the gun..or where the other two rounds went, it never said that it was in the neighbors house. and since when did everyone start believing the press 100% they only write what they are told and do you actually think the police tell then all of the facts. no they save the important ones for the trial "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 5, 2006 2:01 PM:

" I would just like to say that it seems to me that not alot of people actually read the article, or if they did they didnt comprehend it. alot of these comments are about stuff not even mentioned. like the fact that she didnt shoot him while he was pissing, that article says that they found a wet spot and assumed that he had entered the yard to urinate. or that she has no training for the gun all the article mentioned is that the gun was registered to a friend, and they had traded guns "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 5, 2006 1:56 PM:

" TO LODIAN the only way you could personally know of big parties in my neighborhood is if you personally attended one of those parties. why dont you disclose your neighborhood because im sure that i could personally tell you of the parties in your neighborhood. the point is parties happen everywhere. "

Happy Days wrote on Nov 5, 2006 12:38 PM:

" Great Job! The right to bear arms, the right to be free! Why leave this scum for PD? He'll be back on the street in a matter of days (hours). Best shot them and save the taxpayers some money. Go Girl! Stand up for yourself and your family. "

nicole(15) wrote on Nov 5, 2006 11:25 AM:

" listen neighbor noelle didnt go back into he house to get a gun she got the gun to go tell my mom that he was in my backyard the gun was for protection i dont think u understand, PROTECTION! plus her daughter is old enough to know not to go outside!plus her daghter was sick she was pucking would you go outside if u were pucking? "

nicole(15) wrote on Nov 5, 2006 11:19 AM:

" lodian, dont go off on amiee, because her daughter was sick and she is my friend she still is sick and ya noelle was talking to a friend but she was also caring for her daughter she was no more then 10 feet away from her soo dont say you know the actuall facts when all your saying is what YOU want people to believe!im also 15 incase your wondering and how would you like to go through all that!!!!!!!????? "

I Agree With Aimee wrote on Nov 5, 2006 11:10 AM:

" IF Fabrizio was up late knitting socks for orphans in Africa and IF she used her psychic powers to determine that Ortega was planning to murder everyone on her block and IF she knew that God would reach down from Heaven to guide her stray bullets safely away from her neighbors, then this was a good shooting. "

nicole(15) wrote on Nov 5, 2006 11:09 AM:

" to lodian wat kind of parties r u talkin about even if we had a party so wat! its our house our property, we pay taxes on these house just like u! and its not like were up past midnight!! if it bothers u soo much than call the cops and stop talkin your crap!! and its not like noelle was just shooting random people in the middle of the night!!! "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 10:27 AM:

" I wonder if we would find so many posters sympathizing with the Shooter is she had knifed the Urinator instead of shooting him. "

nylodian wrote on Nov 5, 2006 8:57 AM:

" I forgot to say this earlier, but big applause for Mr. Ross (the WWII Marine) who held down the drunken scum after he lunged at him back in July. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 8:25 AM:

" Aimee: Thank you for your clarification. I had not realized that you were speaking in a strictly hypothetical sense and not referring to this actual case. Perhaps you can work to make that a little clearer in your future posts? "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 8:23 AM:

" nk(15): As I said to Crystal, I thank God for your safety. I also hope that you will not follow the Shooter's example when it comes to firearms. Shooting sports can be a wonderful hobby and every American should own a gun to protect their home and family but there is a tremendous responsibility that accompanies gun ownership. If you have a gun, you must know how to use it and train with it to the point that you can safely defend yourself without putting innocent live in danger. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 8:19 AM:

" Crystal: I don't know what comments you have been reading but I haven't seen anyone here imply that the Shooter shot the Urinator because she was a racist. Perhaps another blog? In any case, I am happy to hear that you are OK. When unguided bullets start flying in random directions, innocent people can get hurt very quickly. Thank god you made it through this unscathed! "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 8:15 AM:

" WY: I don't think anyone here is defending the Urinator. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 5, 2006 8:14 AM:

" Aimee: You have a very active imagination. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 5, 2006 4:09 AM:

" almond dr resident: I hope you address this issue at your next Neighborhood Watch meeting. I think a discussion on firing a gun in a dark backyard should be discouraged in most cases. Take note of the people that disagree and put up a for sale sign as to avoid stray bullets. I'm being serious, not flip. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 5, 2006 4:05 AM:

" Aimee:"IF"there was a child in the house,then why the heck did this woman leave that child to go outside to confront a stranger in the dark?The police were called at 1"43am,they arrived at 1:45am.Fabrizio didn't have a long wait. Why was she so compelled to get the gun, go outside and start shooting? This is not the old west and this is not the country.This is in town next to other families.Glad I don't live next to Fabrizio and her wild gun slinging.I am 100% for "RESPONSIBLE" gun ownership, but not the ignorance of one so irresponsible. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 5, 2006 3:59 AM:

" Aimee: What other person was Fabrizio protecting? There is no mention of anyone else in the home. You are stating too many "what if's" for reasons to shoot the urinator. A sick child was never mentioned. The urinator advancing toward Fabrizio was never mentioned. You state that Fabrizio "was probably up ministering to her child". What? You don't know that! The articles on this story stated that Fabrizio was OUTSIDE talking to a friend at 1:45am, not inside with a child. There was no child. You are making the scene sound more vulnerable than it really was. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 5, 2006 3:39 AM:

" Goodmove: Ignorant and extreme. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 5, 2006 3:38 AM:

" almond dr resident: Perhaps you misunderstood my meaning when I said "I've heard of the parties over there". You made my point for me as I meant that teens could have been "stupidly" wandering after a late party as they do in many neighborhoods in town. Your neighborhood is NO exception as I personally know of the big parties in your neighborhood. "

crystal (neighbor) wrote on Nov 4, 2006 11:13 PM:

" Hello! my name is crystal noelle is my neighbor and im so sick of most of these comments saying she shot because she is a rasist and SHES NOT! when she shot it was towards my house and no one had found any bullets so ha... Noelle is a great person and none of you know her and i hate people who judge people. you dont even know her andhalf this stuff is a lie and im sick of these news repoters twisting up peoples words... and leonard GET A LIFE YOU DONT KNOW NOELLE! "

nk(15) wrote on Nov 4, 2006 11:03 PM:

" im only 15,im also noelles neighbor and the reason y she shoot him was because she was going to tell my mom that he was in our backyard and she had the gun incase she saw him she told him to back up, he didnt she shot, plain and simple and leonard get a life and stop bothering noelle all she was doing was protecting herself, my family and her childern!!!!!!so move on and stop talkin ur crap u dnt know the story!!! "

nicole(age 15) wrote on Nov 4, 2006 10:52 PM:

" im only 15, im noells neighbor and to set the record straight noelle came over to tell my mom that he was in my backyard and he happened to jump over my side fence, which is next to hers, and she brought the gun for protection and saw him jump over the fence and he started walking toward her and she told him to back up and he kept moving forward so she shot,and leonard you need to get a life and stop bothering noelle because all she was doing was protecting herself, my family, and her own children! "

Aimee wrote on Nov 4, 2006 10:06 PM:

" No where did I state that I was there, or that I knew what was going on. If you'll read the article and Noelle's comments, you'll see that my comments were grounded in what she said happened, not my version of the events. And to think I was beginning to miss our little friendly "conversations". "

WY wrote on Nov 4, 2006 10:02 PM:

" I feel bad for her, not the urinator. She was scared with fear to do what she did. Maybe now the urinator will become a friend of Bills. "Hi I'm the Urinator ... And I'm an Alcoholic. I'm here on a court order cuz I was a lucky dumb ass.... wanna see my bullet holes" "

Aimee wrote on Nov 4, 2006 10:02 PM:

" If you'll read my comments carefully, you'll notice that the first was simply a regurgitation on the state of the law. The second comment was a continuation of that, coupled with an "if" hypothesis. The third was a comment on the man's injuries, possibly indicating Noelle's state of mind and intent at the time she shot him. My last comment centered on the fact that she had a sick child. I was simply stating that it is possible for her to be up early in the morning with a sick child. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 4, 2006 9:58 PM:

" Oh, Leonard, I was beginning to miss your acrid comments! I'm glad to see that you are still alive and well and finding fault with my point of view. Do you remember last time we sparred verbally? I recall you went away licking your wounds. "

Hamad Abib wrote on Nov 4, 2006 9:55 PM:

" I dont have time to read all this crap, but poor LEONARD is still drooling over his keyboard or his shoes. Way to go Noelle !!!!!!!!! "

WY wrote on Nov 4, 2006 9:49 PM:

" I truly wish her well, this isn't a good deal anyway you look at it. People have lost their manners.drunk or not the urinator could have peed in the street and she should have stayed in the house if the situation were dangerious to her and her kids. I am 100% all for protecting my family. I would shoot if broke into,but they would be inside not on the lawn,and 911 would have heard the whole thing. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 4, 2006 7:52 PM:

" As far as I can see, there is no evidence that the Urinator was advancing on anyone, unless he was advancing while he was urinating. As for the fact that she only wounded him, given the fact that two of her shots went off into the neighbor's property, I would say that is a sign of poor marksmanship, not restraint on the part of the shooter. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 4, 2006 7:50 PM:

" Almond: Tell it to Aimee. She seems to think she knows exactly what happened as well as what each individual was thinking. The Shooter said that she only had to answer to God, perhaps Aimee thinks that the Shooter was referring to her. "

Goodmove wrote on Nov 4, 2006 7:49 PM:

" This was nothing more than a way of thinning out the garbage from our community. Good riddance. "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 4, 2006 5:42 PM:

" only Noelle and Mr Ortega and the few people who were at the scene at the time know what really happened. I really think that everyone should wait for the court procedings, if there are any to pass judgement. after all I thought I lived in America. where everyone is presumed innocent untill proven guilty. and just for everyones info. if there are charges. criminal court cases are open to the public, as well as criminal court records. "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 4, 2006 5:37 PM:

" TO WY, Im very glad to hear that nothing serious happened during your two incidents. this man had a record of attacking people, an ELDERLY MAN who are any of us to say that he was not threating her, lunging tword her or the other people outside at the time. and lets not forget he has an alcohol probem that had previously been adressed by the courts. OH YEA and he was breaking many different laws and court orders at the time she shot him... "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 4, 2006 5:31 PM:

" TO LODIAN, what exactly does "I've heard of the parties over there in that neighborhood" mean. our neighbor hood is a pretty quiet neighborhood. I suppose that your neighborhood NEVER has parties, or that you or your children (if you have any) ever attended parties in your youth. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 4, 2006 3:33 PM:

" If her daughter was sick, that would be a good reason why she was up so early in the morning and so protective. All of us with children know that when your child is sick, you don't get much sleep. She was probably up ministering to her child when she heard the neighbor yell for help. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 4, 2006 3:30 PM:

" It is also instructive to note that Noelle did not mortally wound her intruder, indicating that she meant to stop him from further advancing toward her, not to kill him. Any and all liability she may encounter in the future will revolve around whether or not her actions were reasonable in light of the situation that occurred. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 4, 2006 3:27 PM:

" In addition, the law allows an individual to use deadly force in order to protect another person if they reasonably believe that the would-be attacker or trespasser will do serious bodily harm to that other person. So, even though this person did not enter her home, if she reasonably believed that he posed a threat, she can use deadly force. "

Aimee wrote on Nov 4, 2006 3:25 PM:

" The law used to be that a person had to "retreat" into their home in order to assess the danger, to avoid inflicting deadly force upon an individual for trespassing. The current law states that there is no duty to retreat into one's home to avoid an attacker/trespasser "

WY wrote on Nov 4, 2006 2:53 PM:

" I never hung up the phone. I stayed on line with the athorites the whole time and if i had to shoot someone I would of had evidence of what happened. In todays world you will get caught dragging some one in from the outside crime seen. Doesn't any one watch CSI. Covering you tracks with a branch of pine needles just won't work .lol Leonard is right. If you own a gun know the law. "

WY wrote on Nov 4, 2006 2:45 PM:

" To Alomond Dr. Resident... This has happened to me not once but twice when an intruder has been inside my house and many times out side as a matter of fact most recently a month ago. an I shot no one. When i was a girl in the country and my home was being ransacked, I sat in a small corner with my dad's 357 on the phone with the sheriff and let it pass. Scary!!!!I would of shot them if they found me. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 4, 2006 9:49 AM:

" What if? What if this urinator was not actually the guy they thought he was? What if he was a stupid teenager who made a stupid choice after a party. I've heard of the party's over there in that neighborhood. The kid would deserve punishment but not death. I think some of you that "don't" have, or never did have, teenagers should re-think your position on the shooting (four shots in the dark!) of this urinator. Fabrizio needs to be charged. "

voice of reason wrote on Nov 4, 2006 8:53 AM:

" Don't forget, this is Lodi! Livable, Lovable Lodi. "

I was always told..... wrote on Nov 4, 2006 1:17 AM:

" if they are in your house shoot them, if they are outside of your house, shoot them, drag them in, and then call the police. "

Voice of Reason wrote on Nov 4, 2006 12:55 AM:

" To Noelle: you wrote that only God can judge you. Wrong! twelve of your peers will soon be judging you. Good luck "

Voice of Reason wrote on Nov 4, 2006 12:53 AM:

" In Leonard's defense, this is what happened when Noelle took the fight to an unarmend man outside her house when she should have been inside, protecting her family, until the police arrived. California Penal Code: 245(a)(2) Any person who commits an assault upon the person of another with a firearm shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than six months and not exceeding one year, or by both a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) and imprisonment. "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 3, 2006 8:53 PM:

" im not just talking about the legal aspects. this woman now and for the rest of her life has to deal with the fact that she nearly killed someone. that is something that sticks with you forever. yes she believes she was protecting her family. but like she said only god can judge her. "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 3, 2006 8:50 PM:

" I would just like to point out that you all seem to know how you would react to a situation like this. when its happening to you IN THE HEAT OF THE MOMENT. everything that you thought you do... well thats not how it happens.. trained or not...you all are quick to judge her. but NO one seems to think about how this will affect her. "

almond dr resident wrote on Nov 3, 2006 8:46 PM:

" why is everyone so focused on him pissing in her yard. when noelle herself says that the resident from almond dr was chasing him after he tried TO BREAK INTO HIS HOME... how can anyone predict what a drunk person who is on the run after trying TO BREAK INTO SOMEONES HOME is going to do. "

Weezer wrote on Nov 3, 2006 8:40 PM:

" Sprinklers? Good idea, Leonard! Much better than a bullet that says, "to whom it may concern." "

Leonard wrote on Nov 3, 2006 7:51 PM:

" Turning the sprinklers on is also a very effective way of getting rid of stray urinators. "

Keep off... wrote on Nov 3, 2006 7:37 PM:

" Noelle.. I think this speaks volumes, and because of your actions, maybe people will learn not to risk doing inappropriate things in other people's yards... Whatever happened to respecting someone else's property.. "

wtf wrote on Nov 3, 2006 6:12 PM:

" We had an incident similar to this where a young man was also using our yard as a urinal. It was about 1:30 a.m. I stood at the window, in the darkened house and behind the blinds - where I couldn't be seen - I was just a voice. When he was doing his thing, I said in a very sad, calm voice, "Don't do **that**." Scared the bejeezus out of him LOL! But back up is always good to have, too. "

lodi resident wrote on Nov 3, 2006 5:40 PM:

" the lady with the gun wow she sounds like a lose cannon ready to shoot at anyone . that gun made her brave. guns kill people like that lady shoudn't own a gun. "

Jason Johnson wrote on Nov 3, 2006 4:18 PM:

" Cont.... Stray bullets can be deadly, and handguns and rifles should not be used in the city. Remember a bullet from a gun can travel anywhere from a half a mile to five miles. Shot from a shotgun shell will disperse, and travels a very short distance, losing velocity quickly, especially when it hits sheet rock or a wall. Protect your children and neighbors Lodi, switch to a safer weapon if possible. "

Jason Johnson wrote on Nov 3, 2006 4:18 PM:

" Noelle, you did what you felt you needed to - to protect your family. If citizens want to use a firearm to protect themselves in their home, however,(which we certainly have the right to do) they should strongly consider using a short barrel (not an illegal sawed-off) shotgun. This has a couple of advantages: 1) aiming is not as important, 2) stray shot will at worst embed in a wall of a neighbor's or your own home, and will very unlikely have the ability to harm or kill anyone that it is not intended to. "

A Reader wrote on Nov 3, 2006 4:16 PM:

" After laughing about the situation I have to admit that the critics have a point about someone firing off stray rounds and hitting neighbors and passerbys - if that's how bad her shots actually were. We don't want any accidental hits. Still she did hit the man she aimed for. All's well that ends well. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 3, 2006 2:15 PM:

" (contimnued)...Not defending the creep in her yard, it's just that it could have been some benign incident like a kid or something. One just can't shoot wildly in their yard, especially in town where another home/family is so close sleeping in their own home. Very scary gun incident with this gal. Sounds like she lost control and her head. This is what makes gun owners look bad. "

To Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson wrote on Nov 3, 2006 2:15 PM:

" Exactly our point. He was not trying to get into her house. He was running from a neighbor and she decided to play target practice with him. You cannot use deadly force, a gun, self defense like that unless you are in immediate danger for your life. She put herself closer to him by running outside after grabbing her gun instead of locking her door. He did not come inside or attempt to come inside her house. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 3, 2006 2:14 PM:

" Four shots in the dark? Too free and loose with that gun. I really don't see how Fabrizio was in danger where she needed to shoot to kill as she did have a few friends right there standing outside with her and the other neighbor said he called the police. Why did she still feel the need to go back into her house, get the gun, perhaps still having to load it, come back outside and then proceed to shoot outdoors in the dark? (continued).... "

Leonard wrote on Nov 3, 2006 2:12 PM:

" WTF: As they say, an Armed Society is a Polite Society. "

Neighbor wrote on Nov 3, 2006 2:02 PM:

" I just don’t understand how Ms Fabrizio could go into her home to protect her child only to leave the child and go back outside with a gun. What is she thinking? If she really wanted to protect the child, she should have stayed in the house with the child. What would have happened if the child came out and walked up to Ms Fabrizio from behind and reached out to touch her? Would Ms Fabrizio shoot her out of fear too? "

Leonard wrote on Nov 3, 2006 1:21 PM:

" WTG: For the hundredth time, the Urinator was not in the Shooter's house. Please read the article before commenting. If you can't understand the article, ask a grown up to explain it to you. "

wtf wrote on Nov 3, 2006 1:20 PM:

" We laugh because that's what would happen. Instead, we've become a nation of neutered dogs who sit around in a corner, fearfully chewing on our knuckles until the authorities arrive to (maybe) get the bad guy. We need to repeal the gun laws and make sure all citizens are armed and know how to use their weapons. "

wtf wrote on Nov 3, 2006 1:18 PM:

" To Leonard: Not only would it prevent accidental shootings; it would instill respect for the weapon and, like I said, would be a BIG deterrent to crime. We've all seen the scene in the movie where the crook pulls out a gun to rob a store or bar, thinking he'll get away with it - and before he knows it, he's surrounded by all the patrons with THEIR guns aimed right at him - at which point, he slinks away after getting his butt kicked. (Continued) "

Way to go wrote on Nov 3, 2006 12:56 PM:

" A stranger in my home. I am not going to ask, "By the way do you have a gun"? Are you here to hurt me? Good job. Practice so your aim gets beter. "

Weezer wrote on Nov 3, 2006 12:04 PM:

" T&C, I never said nor implied that because he violated his no drinking order, he should be shot. I just said that Ortega's looking for trouble with his behavior. Check your reading comprehension again. And why would I want to shoot him because he's a Mexican? I could be Mexican and you wouldn't have the slightest idea. "

Weezer wrote on Nov 3, 2006 11:51 AM:

" I'm not surprised that this article got more responses than election-related issues. Why? This strikes closer to home. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 3, 2006 11:06 AM:

" WTF: I agree completely. Gun handling and safety should be taught in school. A program to instill proper respect for firearms would swiftly eliminate the accidental shootings that anti gun activists use as an excuse to attack the 2nd Ammendment. "

Zoro wrote on Nov 3, 2006 11:06 AM:

" Leonard. You said,"The LAW says that if you shoot an unarmed man for trespassing on your property, you are, in fact, committing a crime." There is NO law that says this. Don't be saying false things. NO ONE should be putting this lady down as no one knows what was going through her mind but her. "

WY wrote on Nov 3, 2006 10:20 AM:

" everyone... think how you react to adrenaline. Sometimes I can stay calm and sometimes I shake. It's the feeling you have inside, and how everyone responds different to it. I think that both of those factors should be able to be controlled somewhat by a gun owner.I don't need a gun when I'm shaking. But if they come in, they have six times to get away with my shakey aim. Dance!!! "

wtf wrote on Nov 3, 2006 10:10 AM:

" A well-armed society; one that knows proper gun use and safety, is a civilized society. The way things are now, with the gun grab laws in effect, only the criminals have weapons because they blow off the law in the first place. Trust me, a LOT of crime would be **prevented** if the criminals didn't know whether their victim was armed or not. As it is, it's like shooting fish in a barrel for them. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 3, 2006 10:09 AM:

" Deadly Force: I see from the article that she sent two of her shots out into the neighborhood. It sounds to me like she either couldn't see what she was shooting at or didn't have the skill to hit what she was aiming at. Under either circumstance, she shouldn't have been discharging a firearm in crowded city environment. "

wtf wrote on Nov 3, 2006 10:07 AM:

" What needs to be done is to repeal all those stupid "gun grab" laws. The U.S. should take a lesson from Switzerland where everyone in the country, man & woman, 18 years and up is issued a firearm and certified to use it. Fire arm safety should be taught to children, boy & girl, from the age of 10. And people should be allowed to carry their weapons on their persons. (Continued) "

Leonard wrote on Nov 3, 2006 10:06 AM:

" Power People: I don't have any idea where you got the idea that I side with the criminals in this case. I absolutely support the right to use deadly force if someone breaks into your house and I think that anyone caught urinating in public should be arrested. How is that "siding with the criminals"? "

wtf wrote on Nov 3, 2006 10:05 AM:

" No one really knows what happened except for those involved. Leonard is right about certain laws regarding shooting on one's property. It seems no one on this blog recalls some of the outrageous events of a few years ago when it was the **homeowners** who were tossed in jail for shooting a repeat thief while the thief was in their house. What needs to be done... (continued) "

WY wrote on Nov 3, 2006 10:03 AM:

" I think adrenaline and how people react to it, Is a big factor.I might have done the same but but I didn't. Not being sure of your ability with a gun can increase the adrenaline and make you do things you wouldn't do when you are calm. Being sure of your fire arm is a must as a gun owner. Go to the range often. The lost rounds could have hurt to some one in a home near by. Every one should learn from this. "

Deadlyforce? wrote on Nov 3, 2006 9:40 AM:

" I see from the article that she shot low....doesn't sound like intent to kill. "

Power To The People wrote on Nov 3, 2006 9:36 AM:

" Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson, you definately have the right mindset. Many others would do the same. As far as you Leonard, I'm convinced that you've probable engaged in some type of criminal activity in your lifetime. Why else are you so quick to side with the criminals? Hmmmm... You must like the crooked system that we have here in America. "

Power to the People wrote on Nov 3, 2006 9:31 AM:

" Okay, so maybe we shouldn't shoot a drunk guy who urinates on your lawn, but if for some reason he made his way to my front door, then I'd blast him full of lead. We have every right to protect our families! "

WY wrote on Nov 3, 2006 9:13 AM:

" This is my opinion, I would have secured my home and stayed on the phone with 911 and turned on all the outside lights and inside off. also, told the 911 that if anyone breached her doorway shes firing a round at the dumb ass who doesn't belong so tell the the squad car that i have a gun. Everyone should be thankful that this partying fool isn't DOA. "

WY wrote on Nov 3, 2006 9:09 AM:

" OMG... I don't even have to post! I am in total agreement with Leonard...lol Maybe ,I want to know what's up with the reaction time of the police. and did noelle tell the 911 OP that she got out her 38. we had issues around here too and I think the Police were very busy that night. But she has a family with children and now she might go to jail because the law is against her. "

T & C wrote on Nov 3, 2006 9:04 AM:

" Hey,reader, the bars close at 2 AM and there are plenty of drunks around. The lucky ones, the good old Boyz, get a ride home with the LPD and not a ticket, like us "common folks" would.And, MHRC, that's a great, funny blog about the serial urinator. Or do you mean terminator? "

Zoro wrote on Nov 3, 2006 8:57 AM:

" Leonard. Still waiting for that Penal Code section. "

Is Noelle related to Paul Alamo? wrote on Nov 3, 2006 8:39 AM:

" Maybe they guy was peeing with a knife in his hand. Hmmm? "

To Mr Smith and Wesson wrote on Nov 3, 2006 7:12 AM:

" From the way you talk I bet you haven't ever shot a gun in your whole life. "

To Stephanie wrote on Nov 3, 2006 7:09 AM:

" Have you found the other two bullets yet? "

Leonard wrote on Nov 3, 2006 6:52 AM:

" I seriously doubt that this reckless woman will ever appear in a NRA ad. Her fundamental ignorance of the basic rules regarding deadly force runs contrary to pretty much everything the NRA teachs. The NRA is all about using firearms safely and responsibly. This shooter sent two rounds into her neighbors houses. She could have very easily killed the children who were sleeping within. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 3, 2006 6:47 AM:

" S&W: Are you really incapable of reading or are you just not bright enough to understand what you read? The Urinator was peeing in her yard, not breaking into her house. Please, do try to follow along. "

nylodian wrote on Nov 3, 2006 6:46 AM:

" However, anyone with a gun needs training not just how to use it, but WHERE. Stay in the house, call 911, and only shoot the jerk if he actually gets in. But hindsight is 20/20 and it's easy to criticize when you're not the one in that situation. "

nylodian wrote on Nov 3, 2006 6:33 AM:

" I totally sympathize with the woman. There was NO way she could tell the guy's motives, and chose to act first. This is about a woman protecting her children first, and worrying about consequences second. "

No More Lodi wrote on Nov 3, 2006 6:25 AM:

" I hope to see Noelle in one of the National Rifle Association advertisements... "I am the NRA." I think I might even buy her a membership in the NRA. Yes, the last comment about moving... It really is time to move away from this gang-infested and crime-ridden city. Good job Noelle!! "

MHRC wrote on Nov 3, 2006 6:15 AM:

" to think lodi had a serial urinator in their midst and no one knew...... i wonder if he had a putty knife in his pocket. "

A Reader wrote on Nov 3, 2006 6:14 AM:

" "The law" is applied to what the homeowner reasonably thought was occurring not what may have been actually occurring. Men who get themselves drunk at nearly 2am and tresspass onto the residential property of sleeping women are going to have a problem in Lodi. We all know how dangerous hobos, vagrants, Meth Freaks and other trash can be - that's why we have guns. If she says the was terrified she probably was. It's not like she shoots somebody on a regular basis. "

Voice of Reason wrote on Nov 3, 2006 12:58 AM:

" TO all the "you go girl" people out there, use a little common sense. I'm as pro gun as they get but you gotta use your head. If the dude tries to get in the house and you fear for your life, blast 'em. But you can't claim you fear for your live when you go out to confront him in the yard. I hate thieves more than anyone and have no pitty for the drunken fool who got shot. Just use your heads people. "

Stephanie wrote on Nov 2, 2006 11:21 PM:

" I am Noelles next door neighbor and have talked with Noelle extensively about what happened and know the actual facts about these events. Having said that my home is in the direction that she was shooting and as for all these comments about how we have to worry about her shooting again, I feel she used good judgement given the circumstances and have no fear of this happening again.Can we all not forget that this person was a criminal WHO WAS BREAKING THE LAW! Noelle is the victim here. She did nothing to bring this onto herself. "

Mom wrote on Nov 2, 2006 10:34 PM:

" Thank goodness no one was killed. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 2, 2006 9:02 PM:

" bfd: Nowhere in the article does it tell us that Fabrizio called the police or spoke to the urinating man. Nor does it tell us that she was threatened by this man. My personal opinion is that Fabrizio shot too soon and without being in iminent danger from this man. She was with other people and could have went to the neighbors house. Why confront when you don't "have" to? "

Mr. B wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:55 PM:

" Can't believe I'd ever say I agreed with Leonard but I must say I do in this case. I'm not one that has a problem knocking off some of these trouble making thugs and I'm sure Ortega probably is one. IMO But when your locked in your house, grab a gun and run outside and shoot someone, sounds like trouble didn't come to her she went looking for it.. Glad I wasn't looking for my cat that night.. "

Zoro wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:48 PM:

" Leonard. What law is it you are reading that says you can't shoot someone who is tresspassing. Tell me which section of the Penal Code please. "

He deserved what he got wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:41 PM:

" There goes Leonard flapping his gums again on a situation that he knows nothing about! Seeing how the police are so slow to respond these days, the woman had every right to do what she did! It's also very possible this man had other intentions, such as rape, but he'll never admit that to the police! Go figure "

Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:37 PM:

" Leonard. Looks like your soft on crime, pinko, leftist "we must love the killer" mentality is losing. Try to get into my house tonight. You will get a blast from a legal sawed off shotgun 5 times, it will be followed by 9 rounds from my S & W 9 mil. A person's home is their castle. Drunk ? Man I am sorry, high on speed, Sorry, Hyped up on drugs ? Sorry. homeowners have to re-take their homes from the bottom feeding scum. "

Lodian wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:34 PM:

" Four shots in the dark? Too free and loose with that gun. I really don't see how Fabrizio was in danger where she needed to shoot to kill as she did have a few friends right there with her outside and the other neighbor said he called the police. Why did she still feel the need to go into her house, get the gun, perhaps still having to load it, and then proceed to shoot outdoors in the dark? (continued).... "

Lodian wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:07 PM:

" Why did this woman not call the police?Ms.Fabrizio was already outside,talking with a friend,and not inside afraid while someone was breaking in the house.Why would she run in the house and start shooting?I have a feeling she will be brought up on charges for this.God forbid it was some dopey teenager playing around or worse running from gang members or something. In that situation the teen would need a to get a good ration but certainly not shot. Did Fabrizio even say anything before shooting the urinating man? Like,"Hey,get the heck outta here or I'll shoot"? Bad judgment indeed. "

neighbor wrote on Nov 2, 2006 7:44 PM:

" hey noelle they need to know the truth because im so mad at them because only you really know the real truth and why would he pick your yard to pee and not any one else and how can you not have the commen sence to know if some one is pointing a gun at you screaming back up you must be crazy... "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 7:42 PM:

" BFD: I don't know who Jack is but I think I can safely say that I hit what I shoot at. Why is that, you might ask. Well, I am a pretty good shot mainly because I have trained with professionals and I practice regularly. This woman is a loose cannon (pardon the pun). She used deadly force when it was not warranted and she put her neighbors in danger by firing randomly into their houses. There is no excuse for her behaivor. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 7:38 PM:

" Joe: I don't know about whiney or leftist but I do own a gun and I will shoot anyone who tries to harm my family. I will not, however, be making idle threats nor will I be randomly firing shots into my neighbors houese if I find someone urinating in my yard. Owning a firearm is all about responsibility. Some people are mature enough to shoulder that responsibility, others are not. "

vigilante wrote on Nov 2, 2006 7:32 PM:

" were there children in the house with that loaded firearm? "

tired of getting ripped off wrote on Nov 2, 2006 7:04 PM:

" YOU GO GIRL! MY FAMILY AND I HAVE BEEN VICTIMS OF THIEVES FOR THE PAST YEAR WE TURNED IN 17 THOUSAND DOLLARS TO OUR INSURANCE COMPANY, I DON'T CARE WHAT HIS REASON WAS, YOU SHOULD'NT BE IN ANY ONES YARD AT THAT TIME!!!!. PEOLPE ARE TIRED OF THIEVES! YOU KNOW WHAT THEY SAY, THICK AS THIEVES IN THE NIGHT. "

bfd wrote on Nov 2, 2006 6:39 PM:

" Leonard, back off jack. I hope someone pees on your lawn and the side of your house at 2AM. Wait until you hear the real facts jack, she did call several times, and was threatened. I don't believe if you were in the same situation you could hit a standing tree 2 out of 4. Shooting someone is bad, but this guy and situation she's a HERO. "

Hey NEWS SENTINEL wrote on Nov 2, 2006 6:32 PM:

" Do you take long naps between posting blogs or what? The Record posts ALL blogs within 5 minutes or less. Yours is the lousiest website for time to post a blog. Most operate 24 hours a day also. What's your problem? This is copied for pasting later. "

the vigilante wrote on Nov 2, 2006 6:03 PM:

" Maybe they then should shoot the two men I saw urinating on the brick wall in between the roach coach and the block retaining wall at the Church and Turner Road location. Twice in the last three weeks while going south on Church from Turner in the late afternoon. They park the wagon and leave 3 feet or so between the wall and the wagon and it turns into a public urinal. On a dry day when they're not there, you can see the puddles and also the vehicle fluids further ahead. "

Joe Winchester wrote on Nov 2, 2006 5:48 PM:

" Leonard. You are just a whiney leftist. Home protection is as old as the Pilgrims. If more people feared messing with people's property we would all be better off. My children used to tell their friends "Don't mess with our house or my dad. He will not hesitate to kill you". Things were pretty quiet here for more than 30 years. You are an excusing enabler. Better go do some meetings. "

to Jury wrote on Nov 2, 2006 5:44 PM:

" Were you one of the jurors on the Simpson trial? You sure sound like it. "

WY wrote on Nov 2, 2006 5:32 PM:

" I agree with Leonard..lol! I would of, She should have, told the 911 OP that she had a gun and if the guy moves closer to her that she will shoot him. They would have been there in 5 second flat. Now she is in legal trouble. She should have never had the gun in the first place if she didn't know the law. guns don't hurt people ... people hurt people.I am sure Leonard is right about that law issue. "

Weezer from T & C wrote on Nov 2, 2006 5:25 PM:

" Thanks for the clarification. Again, if he violated his no drinking order, he should be shot? You're funny. Or maybe you'd want to shoot him because he's a Mexican? "

T & C wrote on Nov 2, 2006 5:19 PM:

" I can't believe this article would bring more responses than the election issues and the negative issues being ignored by the Lodi City Council, Lodi Downtown Business Partnership, and the city's financial issues, and the bankrupting of the Lodi Electric District. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 4:58 PM:

" Good point neighbor! Forget about the two shots that hit the horrible Urinator, what about the two shots that went off into the neighbors houses? "

cmd wrote on Nov 2, 2006 4:24 PM:

" yes, this guy sounds like he has a drinking problem. on the other hand, i can think of lots of lodi youths that are a$$es like this kid is. he also just turned 21. try visiting the lodi court house on mondays and tuesdays to see how many people you know are there for dui or drunk in public related offenses... "

wth wrote on Nov 2, 2006 4:22 PM:

" "Police had initially been called at 1:43 a.m. to the 300 block of Almond Drive, where a man said someone was trying to break into his home." AND SHOT AT "was hit twice in the 300 block of Finch Run Drive around 1:45 a.m." . . . Lots of time for the cops to respond. Where are the mentions of the supposed four 911 calls she made before she went for her gun inside and ran out to shoot him? "

notenough wrote on Nov 2, 2006 4:18 PM:

" I am sorry it was only a 38. A shotgun would have been better. Two rounds from a 12 gauge would have been alot better, sorry 3 is legal "

d wrote on Nov 2, 2006 4:09 PM:

" a "

neighbor wrote on Nov 2, 2006 4:07 PM:

" I feel less safe knowing that this house (that has brought a considerable increase in traffic down my streetin the last couple of months) is now shooting at people OUTSIDE. I won't be walking near there after dark. Also, I thought that particular house had an alarm. "

Concerned wrote on Nov 2, 2006 4:05 PM:

" I just read the story and all the blogs, seems to me that if you are drunk, have a conviction for elder abuse, and are on probation w\ drinking restrictions. Maybe you should had a clean and sober 21st b-day, but I guess that never crossed his mind. I also feel that the woman's life was not in mortal danger, she should have not shot him, two wrongs in this case. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 3:51 PM:

" Again: The LAW says that if you shoot an unarmed man for trespassing on your property, you are, in fact, committing a crime. There is no evidence that Ortega was trying to break into her house. If Ortega had been trying to break into her house, I would completely support Fabrizio. As things stand, however, I simply do not believe that deadly force is an appropriate response to trespassing. "

Weezer wrote on Nov 2, 2006 3:19 PM:

" I agree with Citizen that because Ortega (and his so-called friends) "sees himself as the victim, therefore he will never be accountable for his actions." He repeated what he did to Ross because he wouldn't learn from his mistakes. He shouldn't drink alcohol ever again because he can't control himself when he's drunk. "

Weezer wrote on Nov 2, 2006 3:11 PM:

" T&C, he didn't violate the court order by urinating in public. It takes a little bit of reading comprehension. The article reads, "Ortega was also placed on probation and ordered not to consume any alcohol for a year." "

T & C wrote on Nov 2, 2006 2:57 PM:

" I just finished reading the blogs Stockton Record on the same subject and one Stocktonian remarked that:If you are from Lodi, you must be racist. Now I wonder why Stockton would have that attitude towards Lodi. Livable, lovable Lodi. "

Again to Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 2:22 PM:

" She knew he was not someone looking for a lost cat because ANOTHER neighbor was chasing him saying call 911 as this guy ran onto her property. Everyone could learn from this: COPS could learn they need to respond FASTER no matter how minor the call sounds. HOMEONWNERS could learn, we should do as Noelle did to keep the lawbreakers off our property and last LAWBREAKERS could learn, you are not going to get away with it anymore!!! "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 1:56 PM:

" For the sake of my children I very much hope that my neighbors have better aim and judgement than this woman. As stray round from a .38 can punch straight through 4 sheets of sheet rock and still kill the sleeping toddler on the other side. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 1:54 PM:

" You Go: When you shoot someone, you should be trying to kill them. The fact that this woman sent two bullets off into her neighbors property is not an indicator (IMO) that she has received adequate training in gun handling. Gun control means hitting what you shoot at and I would say that this woman was lacking. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 1:52 PM:

" Bliz: What part of "he wasn't trying to break into her house" don't you understand? "

Jury wrote on Nov 2, 2006 1:51 PM:

" Noelle a perp? Give me a break. If I am sitting on the jury, God forbid they bring charges against her...Not Guilty all the way. "

... wrote on Nov 2, 2006 1:51 PM:

" Lets hope none of you have teenagers that like to prank their friends and neighbors. Running outside with a gun in your hand and shooting is not OK. You can not shoot someone just because they tresspass. Your life must be in danger. Lock your door, don't go running outside looking to get involved. "

yeah right wrote on Nov 2, 2006 1:48 PM:

" inside the house, calling 911, then grabs her gun to run outside and shoot the guy... sure its self defense. its called lock your door and then if he attempts to enter, you can shot. here you may have been afraid, but that does not give you the right to just shot someone drunk and staggering around. this guy is not going to be homeless soon, 3 gun shot wounds means lots of $$$. "

cmd wrote on Nov 2, 2006 1:44 PM:

" wow. i love how in depth the LNS is going into the gun shot vic's background and really nailing in that the newly 21 year old was not supposed to be drinking. "

You Go Girl! wrote on Nov 2, 2006 1:32 PM:

" Kudos to Noelle! She should teach a class on how to shoot drunken SOB's who try to tinkle on private property. The b****rd deserves what he got, hopefuly next time the bullet will be a fatal one! "

Dan wrote on Nov 2, 2006 1:24 PM:

" She didn't mind judging the drunken man, though, did she? And, looking down the road in my crystal ball, I think she will find there are others (i.e. juries), in addition to "God", who are likely to judge her. "

Blizstain wrote on Nov 2, 2006 1:13 PM:

" I live on the 300 block of Almond Drive, there is a non stop flow of undesirables on that street. The neighbor hood is going down hill fast!! If that guy had been in my yard he would be dead and I would probablly had been arrested cause I do know how to use my firearm!! S&W SW99 .45 cal Anyone who has a prob with that, try to break into my house!! "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 12:11 PM:

" As for blaming the perps, both individuals in this story are perps as far as I can see. Ortega is guilty of trespassing and public indecency, Fabrizio is guilty of irresponsibly discharging a fire arm in the city limits. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 12:10 PM:

" But Ms Fabrizio didn't know anything about Ortega's prior actions. He could have just as easily been someone who got the wrong address, a pet owner looking for their missing cat, ect, ect. The point is that people should show a minimum level of competency when using deadly force and this woman did not show that competency. If everyone popped off a couple of rounds every time they heard something rustling around in the yard we our hospitals would be overwhelmed with the victims of accidental shootings. "

To Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 12:07 PM:

" How do you know she did not have training? Training and real life situations are totally different. One is fake, the other you are scared for your life, when one is scared, they get shaky. Tell me, when the LPD have to shoot at someone, you think they get the MOVING target every time? NOPE!!! they don't, and they are extremely trained. In my line of work, I have been in many robbery training courses by the FBI but I can tell you when the real thing happens, you do what you have to do to protect yourself!! "

T & C wrote on Nov 2, 2006 12:03 PM:

" Weezer, he violated a court order for urinating in public, right? That's understood. So by violating that order, you're allowed to shoot him? You're too much. "

wuzup wrote on Nov 2, 2006 11:52 AM:

" Since Ortega’s BA was 0.27 I bet he had to pee really, really bad and everything else he was going to do was put on hold until that very “urgent” need was satisfied. Being that drunk, I bet Ortega didn’t know his self what he was planning on doing from one moment to the next. Look at Ortega’s behavior with the 81 year-old Mr. Ross and his daughter. I wonder if that incident is indicative of Ortega’s violent disposition when drunk. "

Citizen of Lodi wrote on Nov 2, 2006 11:40 AM:

" It's another case of the perp being the victim, and the victim being the perp. What was she supposed to do? Welcome him inside her home in a drunken rage, serve coffee, have a counseling session before deciding her next move? She called 911 four times. Why did it take that long for the police to get there? It's clear this young man has serious issues. Perhaps a stint in prison will sober him up. What am I thinking? No! Because he sees himself as the victim, therefore he will never be accountable for his actions. "

we need more of this wrote on Nov 2, 2006 11:38 AM:

" shoot first ask questions later thats my motto keep it up lets crack down on the undesirables roaming around in this town "

GMAB wrote on Nov 2, 2006 11:30 AM:

" I agree with Leonard. In California you have to pass a test to get a Handgun Safety Certificate which is needed to purchase a handgun. Before you receive the handgun, the gun dealer must go through a safety demonstration with the purchaser. However, more instruction should be required. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 11:12 AM:

" The point that so many seem to miss is that the man she shot wasn't in her house and he wasn't trying to get into her house.This could just as easily been some neighborhood kid coming home too late from a party. I am all for using deadly force to protect yourself and your family but the key to using that force is the ability to correctly evaluate the threat at hand.If people are going to keep a loaded hand gun around the house they need to have a lot more skill and training than Ms Fabrizio evidently had. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 10:12 AM:

" If someone is going to own a firearm, they should know how to operate it and when to use it. The NRA offers a plentitude of written material on this subject as well as extremely informative classes. If, for some reason, the NRA does not rub you the "right" way, there are personal instructors who can provide the same instruction. "

T & C wrote on Nov 2, 2006 10:10 AM:

" If she fired four shots and hit him twice, where did the other two errant shots go? I'm sure it was a residential neighborhood and one of those errant shots could have wounded or killed a neighbor in an adjacent house. I myself, think that she got very scared and did what she thought was the right thing. I don't see any negligence in this case in my opinion. "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 10:08 AM:

" First of all, if someone doesn't know how to use a particular firearm, they certainly shouldn't be keeping it loaded in their house. Secondly, there is a big difference between simply trespassing and breaking and entering. One justifies deadly force, the other does not. "

Ned wrote on Nov 2, 2006 9:57 AM:

" Awesome work, Noelle. Nuff said. Great job, we're proud of you. "

Ignorant wrote on Nov 2, 2006 9:50 AM:

" Everyone on here is being ignorant, you were not there, and you do not know what he was doing. If you were a single woman with children, you might make the same decision if you were scared. He has a record for attacking an older man....whose to say that he wasn't agressing toward her? "

joaquin gonzalez wrote on Nov 2, 2006 9:31 AM:

" good job noelle. And to you leftie whiners "ooohhh, she shouldnt shoot until she conducts a complete interview with the man to determine his motives": things for you would be different in my house. I shoot to kill. "

Mama Bear wrote on Nov 2, 2006 9:15 AM:

" Good job, Noelle! If I felt my child was threatened , I'd do the same thing. Don't listen to those condemning your actions. You did what you felt at that moment needed to be done. Now, if you had pulled that gun and allowed it to be taken from your hands and used on you, people would be condemning you for pulling a gun and not being prepared to pull the trigger. You can't win in the public's eye. "

Weezer wrote on Nov 2, 2006 9:04 AM:

" Even before the shooting took place, Ortega was already in violation of a court order. The shooting's just an aftermath. He previously lunged at an older man. Only Noelle can tell for sure if Ortega was also threateningly going in her direction. Bottomline, Ortega was trouble waiting to happen. "

lion in winter wrote on Nov 2, 2006 9:02 AM:

" BTW- "victim's friend," you need to change your name- anyone who lets his "friend" with a .27 BAC wander off into the night unattended is no friend at all. "

lion in winter wrote on Nov 2, 2006 9:00 AM:

" She took the fight to the enemy, because she had something precious to defend inside that house. Good for you, Noelle- there is no law that says that you have to shiver in a corner like a mouse, whispering to a police dispatcher until the end comes. From what I hear, itwas reasonable for you to fear for your life, and you did the right thing. "

lion in winter wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:56 AM:

" As far as waiting in your house for what happens next- we just had a woman do that on Oak Street and she came within inches of being raped in front of her infant son. You think its easy to place disabling shots when faced with a stranger in a drunken rage, kicking in your front door in the middle of the night. People drop like a rock from one bullet ON TELEVISION! In real life they often keep coming and do lots of damage with bullets inside them, if they are hit at all. "

lion in winter wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:50 AM:

" The woman should not have to go on an extensive fact finding mission before she protects her home and family. She is awaked in the wee hours, has an intruder on her property, has no idea why he was there, has children to protect in her home. Is he supposed to cower in her home until help arrive? Excuse me but it's HER property, and she has a perfect right to arm herself and go outside and challenge that stranger. If he decides to come at her, and ignore her warnings- bye-bye, drunk boy. "

DW wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:27 AM:

" if the guy only had to PEE why did he not just stand against a tree on the street??????? why was he running, what was he doing out at 2 o'clock in the morning???!!!!!!! "

Who would know wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:24 AM:

" How was she supposed to know what exactly he intended to do?I think she did the right thing, protect herself, her children and her neighbors.To "her" your post is totally ignorant.That still could have been his plan, no one knows he truely was only going to urinate and leave.This could have turned out much worse, the home owner could have been injured here, she was not breaking the law, HE WAS.You break the law, you face the consiquences, obvioulsy he is not a stand up guy, but far from it. "

KT wrote on Nov 2, 2006 8:08 AM:

" to Jo, have you ever fired a semi-auto pistol? If she hadn't used it a lot it would be easy in a panic state to get off four rounds without even knowing it. As for using too much force, he may have charged her as he did Mr. Ross. In any case, it looks like this guy really needs AA. "

David Pine Grove wrote on Nov 2, 2006 7:56 AM:

" Noelle you did the right thing Probably saved someone from a really bad thing. Tom & jerry shame on you Racist, BACK OFF 2a.m. in the morning there should be no one in YOUR YARD! "

T & C wrote on Nov 2, 2006 7:50 AM:

" OK what, here I am.I agree with Leonard on this one.The actual law says that you can't just shoot someone, you have to be physically threatened or attacked. And I don't buy the fact that she had someone else's firearm in her house. Had she been trained how to use at firearm? Just my opinion. It's a lot like you've never had to urinate so bad that you have just gone in your own pants. Livable, lovable Lodi. "

The other way in a hurry... wrote on Nov 2, 2006 7:50 AM:

" This could have gone the other way in a split-second. This women was defending her family. The fear in such a situation can be overwhelming. I am sorry that this man put her in this situation. I am also sorry this man has a problem. Accidents happen! The man put himself in this situation. It was a self-inflicted incident. I hope the lady is okay. "

TF wrote on Nov 2, 2006 7:44 AM:

" One more try,as I tried to post earlier, the shooting victim has a very good case to sue the homeowner. As she stated herself, he was not urinating on her fence or trying to break in, but being chased by a neighbor. LOL "

almond dr resident. wrote on Nov 2, 2006 7:15 AM:

" why is no one asking why he was in her yard at 1:30 in the morning. weather he had to piss or not. and to his friends who are defending him. maybe you should try and get him some help he obviously has a drinking problem. well maybe the courts will step in since he VIOLATED a court order. "

TF wrote on Nov 2, 2006 6:51 AM:

" Right or wrong, he now has a very good case to sue the person that shot him. Since she, herself says he was not urinating or trying to break in, but actually being chased by a neighbor. LOL! "

Leonard wrote on Nov 2, 2006 4:44 AM:

" As a gun owner, I agree with Tom and Jerry. An unarmed man trying to pee in your yard on Halloween does not merit deadly force. "

huh wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:50 PM:

" I can't belive ppl are so ignorant when it comes to the use of guns. It almost seems like someone is a little trigger happy "

What wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:46 PM:

" Where's T&C no post on this one. "

her wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:45 PM:

" I honestly think she's very high on her horses, thinking maybe he'd rape her. "

RACIST!!! wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:44 PM:

" I think he was shot simply because he's mexican!! "

Hector Suarez wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:38 PM:

" to "T"--"Because he was unarmed i think that she used unnessary conduct"---HOW DO you know he was un armed ?? Are you the abiter of what men are pissing and those breaking in ? YOU ARE A COMPLETE FOOL. "he just had to relieve himself its not fair!!" YOU are saying the homeowner has to differentiate between breaking in and pissing? What kind of nut are you? Noelle, your neighbors should be throwing a party for you. I will pay for your bullets !!!!!!!!!!!!! "

why? wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:36 PM:

" How can you shoot someone wearing glasses?!! "

victim's friend wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:33 PM:

" I know the guy I was with him 15 minutes prior to the shooting. He was only trying to pee. He didn't deserve to get shot!!! "

GUN CONTROLESS wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:22 PM:

" I think that was very uncalled for. This women took it upon herself to shoot sumone b4 they even attempted to go near her doors or Windows. She should've called "911: I think she is in the wrong and should be held liable for this. You say Gun Control, That isn't what it is meant for. For Godsakes He was outside. I see if he was Entering the HOME.. People need to use there Brains Be4 using a gun. CALL 911!!!!! "

Mojo wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:21 PM:

" She should have used the money she spent on the gun and fees for the gun, on self defence classes. Then maybe this mix up wouldn't have happened. "

no fair wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:20 PM:

" I think that was very uncalled for. This women took it upon herself to shoot sumone b4 they even attempted to go near her doors or Windows. She should've called "911: I think she is in the wrong and should be held liable for this. You say Gun Control, That isn't what it is meant for. For Godsakes He was outside. I see if he was Entering the HOME.. People need to use there Brains Be4 using a gun. CALL 911!!!!! "

Kyie wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:16 PM:

" She should be evaluated to find out if she has paranoia. That could have led to think he was breaking in. "

Jo wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:15 PM:

" Either way she shouldn't have shot the gun so many times. It seems as though she was trying to kill him, not stop him from entering the home. "

Jessica wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:11 PM:

" What was she doing up at 1:45am outside with a gun? It's not likely that it had taken him 10 minutes to relieve himself... "

Friend wrote on Nov 1, 2006 10:08 PM:

" Ok... I know this guy... He is my friend, and I know for a fact he wasn't trying to break in her home. He did trespass to urinate, but he didn't mean any harm. I could possible understand if she was scared, but to shoot the gun FOUR TIMES?! That is only plausible if he was attacking her!!! "

Noelle wrote on Nov 1, 2006 9:36 PM:

" Just to set things straight~ Mr. Ortega was not urinating on my fence or breaking into my home at the time of the shooting. He was being chased by another neighbor who asked me to call 911 which I did 4 times before grabbing my gun. What would you do if a man is coming at you and you are screaming for him to back away with your sick daughter right on the other side of the door. Only God can judge me. "

tom&jerry wrote on Nov 1, 2006 8:06 PM:

" IF they're in your house shoot them IF they're in the yard call the police!! "

T wrote on Nov 1, 2006 7:45 PM:

" Because he was unarmed i think that she used unnessary conduct and all though he was on the property he was not breaking into the house but in fact he just had to relieve himself its not fair!! "

ra wrote on Nov 1, 2006 6:48 PM:

" Practice makes perfect. "

Accuracy wrote on Nov 1, 2006 6:24 PM:

" Where did the other two shots go? "

Good Job! wrote on Nov 1, 2006 4:58 PM:

" let this be a warning to thieves! Homeowners are willing to fight back! I would do the same to protect my family. "

stuckinlodi wrote on Nov 1, 2006 1:28 PM:

" You go girl! I would do the same thing in similar circumstances. "

raul rodriguez wrote on Nov 1, 2006 1:09 PM:

" good job noelle !!!....remember "Gun Control" means hitting the target !! Taking a leak or breaking in, it is not our job to decide what some criminal is trying to do. "

Wow wrote on Nov 1, 2006 11:51 AM:

" Good for her. It's about time people in this town stood up for themselves. In this world there are two type of people: wolves and sheep. She obviously chose not to be a sheep! "

Comments on this story are now closed.



Leaf Pickup