Justifiable homicide?
 

Shooter: Goal was to disable getaway car
Car wasn't there; McClure says he fired from his van as teen turned toward him.
By Christopher D. Kirkpatrick
ckirkpatrick@charlotteobserver.com
Posted: Monday, Sep. 14, 2009

Seventy-six-year-old C.L. McClure, who shot and killed a 15-year-old robbery suspect last month, told investigators he chased the robbers who broke into his home because he wanted to shoot out the tires of their getaway car, according to a source close to the investigation.

McClure said he went looking for the robbers on a nearby street where he suspected they might have parked a car for their escape, the law enforcement source told the Observer this week.

He ended up in a confrontation and killed Marcus Fluker, one of at least four teens who broke into McClure's home that Saturday afternoon and held him and his wife at gunpoint, authorities say.

The Observer learned new details of the case as the Mecklenburg County District Attorney's Office sorts through whether the Aug. 22 shooting was legally justified. A decision could come this week.

The law is clear that shootings can be easily justified inside someone's home after someone breaks in. But McClure drove after the robbers, plunging the case into more of a gray area, legal experts told the Observer.

Fluker's mother, Felicia Fluker, could not be reached Sunday. But she told the Observer the day after the shooting that her son had fallen in with a bad crowd that day and that he was not that type of person.

She and others say McClure should have called 911 and stayed at his Grier Road home.

Charlotte-Mecklenburg police concluded their investigation without charging McClure. They turned the file over to the DA's office. The CMPD has referred all questions to prosecutors, and they didn't have a comment Friday about the case.

Among the new details:

Police and the DA's office have interviewed McClure extensively, the source said, and McClure says he fired on the 15-year-old because he believed the teen was turning to shoot him.

The shooting has brought unwanted notoriety for McClure, who has received letters and phone calls praising his actions and honks of approval and thumbs-up gestures as drivers pass his house, the source told the Observer.

McClure, without having a lawyer present, took police and officials with the DA's office through the events that led to Fluker's death, the source said.

McClure told authorities he fired a warning shot, the source said.

Investigators say at least four teens broke into the McClure home about 12:30 p.m. that Saturday and bound his hands with duct tape.

He was downstairs and his wife was upstairs with a gun on her. The teens stole McClure's Masonic ring, his wallet and his .38-caliber gun, police said.

After they left, McClure freed himself, grabbed his .22-caliber gun and asked his wife to call 911. He told investigators he believed the thieves would run through woods across Grier Road toward an apartment complex. He drove his van into the complex on Ginger Lane to look for the teens and any parked getaway car.

Authorities later determined there was no getaway car, the source told the Observer.

McClure told investigators he arrived first and watched the group come out of the woods. He saw them move toward his van and he fired a warning shot into the air, hoping they would simply scatter, according to the source.

As the teens bolted, McClure told investigators that Fluker seemed to turn back toward him and McClure thought he was going to shoot at him. So McClure fired at Fluker from inside the van, out the passenger-side window, he told investigators.

Fluker might have just been changing direction as he ran and looking back for his friends, the source said.

McClure declined Sunday again to comment for an Observer article on the shooting.

let's see, a bunch of hooligans hold me and my wife at gunpoint. i find said hooligans. i kill said hooligans.

Well that was one heck of a shot with a .22. But I'm thinking McClure has a big problem defending his actions. His wife was no longer in danger and he'll have a big problem demonstrating that his life was in danger while in the van.

I'd guess he's going down for at least manslaughter.

good shooting for a .22.

So far no charges, and it seems like the public is solidly in this guy's corner. It could be a matter of him being charged and the jury refusing to convict, like happened with Bernie Goetz.

I personally think the man was 100% justified in his actions.

i agree that he will probably be charged. i doubt that he will be convicted of anything worse than a misdemeanor.

Maybe my mind is screwed up but I got a chuckle out of this.

Mother Flucker will have a wrongful lawsuit soon.

lol! mother flucker! that is priceless!

"yeah, mom, i fell in with a bad crowd today. so, i went and held our neighbors at gunpoint while we ransacked their home."

If it was Texas there'd likely be no charges, but it's not.

He is a Shriner (or working on becoming one) no conviction is coming.

they'll probably only charge him with discharging a gun near a residence

The guy sounds like an idiot and lucky to not be in jail. A case in AZ sent a very justified shooter to prison for 10 yrs. because he fired a warning shot, proving (in the jury's eyes) he was not really in fear for his life. If you are in fear for your life, you kill, kill, kill. And talking to the cops and DA without a lawyer present is just insane.

When you 76, do you really even care? Reminds me Clint Eastwood in Gran Torino......

He's getting a manslaughter charge. Well deserved to my mind. They left his home, and at that point the confrontation was over.

The guys an idiot.

I have no practical problems with warning shots, but i do know that you're never supposed to fire one because some scumbag lawyer will then state you were not really in fear for your life if you had time to fire one.

The military uses warning shots, always has, probably always will.....so i have no problem with civvies using them either.

But that being said, it's considered to be quite unwise, so i probably would never fire a warning shot either.

Nowhere near as big an idiot as you are.

The man had just been tied up and had his wife and his home violated, and the police would never have gotten there in time or put any effort into finding them. He did in 15 minutes what the cops would never do- put an end to these scum bags criminal ways.

I applaud him as a hero.

Oh, I have no moral problem with what he did. Nothing ever wrong with taking out the garbage. But there are ways to do it that keep the good guys out of jail and the lawyers less rich.

He may be guilty of not shooting the punk "correctly" so as not to bring charges against himself but I think he did what many others would like to do, in a case like this. jHe should kicked the little "fluker" in the nutsack before shooting him, though.

Maybe the next group of punks will think twice before doing something similar.

To his Mother I would say that I'm truly sorry for her loss BUT if he hadn't have been doing the crime, he would probably still be alive.

I once fell in with a bad crowd one day.... we skipped lunch in 10th-grade and went to a burger joint about half-mile from the school. Lo and behold we hadn't sat down good until the assistant principal walks in and hauls back to school. The burger dude had an arrangement with the school. He'd call and rat you out if you were there during school hours. :p

The assistant principal then called my folks. When I got home my mom smacked me with a broom; then as I tried to blame it on "the bad crowd" I had hooked up with that day she beat me mearly senseless! :o

And, I think she called me a stupid "Mother Flucker" for skipping school.

First and last time I ever did! It was a "priceless" lesson.

I have Never known a Shriner or a Mason that was anything but a good, upstanding individual... men to be admired.