Interviewed?

[bdickens]

An odd occurence happened at home this evening shortly after dark. Before I go ino it, let be give you some background on our arrangement because it will hlep you picture the situation.

My wife and I rent the first floor of a two story duplex situated on 2 1/2 wooded acres on a corner lot. Two college guys live upstairs. The property belongs to a business and there is the main house where the business is off to the left and we are off to the right. The duplex has a fenced in back yard. Out directly behind us is a warehouse and behind the main building is a covered patio type area. Neither the main building nor the duplex are very visible from the road in front. Along the back and both sides of the whole property is fenced with chain link fence and there is a gate along the side by the warehouse. The fence along the road is covered with grape vines from just behind the duplex on back. The front is open to the road. We pretty much have the run of the grounds.

Anyway, not long after dark I hear a soft knock on the door. Thinking it was one of the upstairs neighbors, I opened up the door. Some guy there (I got his description) asks me if I can call a yellow cab for him. He seems mildly drunk. Like one or two beers drunk, not falling over slobbering drunk. That red flag goes up in my mind. "No. I'm sorry, we can't do that," I said in my usual matter-of-fact and somewhat gruff manner.

"You can't?" he asks.

"No. I'm sorry."

He turns to leave, but instead of heading back out the driveway he starts to go around towards the back of the property. Naturally, that has me wondering even more. I watch him for a few seconds and then I follow. I was going to tell him that the drive to the warehouse doesn't go through, but he was gone. I heard a clink like the gate in the chain link fence before I got around the corner of the duplexes little yard. I look all around the property and there is no one to be seen except one of the local cats.

Oh, by the way, my Glock 19 was with me the whole time.

My biggest concerns are as follows:

1) While it is weird enough for someone to go up to someone's house and ask them to call a cab for him, what's weirder is that our place is not very visible from the street and there are other places nearby that are.

2) He disappeared so quickly, presumably through the gap where the gate is chained together, that he would have had to have known about the gate.

I'm sure we've been interviewed. My remarkably intuitive wife thinks this was the second time. (!)

[KC5AV]

If this is the 2nd time, when was the 1st?

[The Annoyed Man]

Sounds like an interview to me.

[Rokyudai]

Maybe this guy met your college student neighbors at a bar and they told him to swing buy. He gets a ride to the place only to find them not there as plans change. He is out a ride. Desperate and not thinking how it looks, knocks on the closest door asking a favor.

Far fetched...don't know where you live....any bars nearby? Did he look like someone who could associate with your neighbors?

[bdickens]

Not a chance. I've seen the people the neighbors have over. He wasn't one of them. He looked to be about late 30's - 40-ish.

[Rokyudai]

gotcha

[camjr]

Don't you have a peephole in the door? I'm surprised you opened the door without first trying to identify who it was.

[Excaliber]

Opening the door to unknown persons is, IMHO, an unacceptable risk in the current environment. Going outside to assess the situation is almost never a good idea because it gives tactical opportunity to a stranger and/or his confederates at distances where effective response to surprise attack is problematical, even if you are armed. If the primary defender exposes himself to attack and is neutralized outside the home, where does that leave the rest of the family?

When you're at home, the interview process should work the other way - the homeowner "interviews" the stranger.

With a simple wireless intercom system (example: http://homesecuritystore.com/ezStore123 ... uctID=1823) and a little prior planning, you can get all the information you need on how to manage an unexpected visitor without exposing yourself to potential attack by the person at the door or his or her unseen companions. For folks willing to part with a few more hard earned shekels, a video intercom and/or CCTV surveillance of the main entry area provides a whole other dimension of information beyond what you can secure through an audio intercom alone.

With the remote intercom unit at the door above the doorbell and the master unit in a convenient area of the home not visible from the exterior door, you can converse with a visitor from a position of safety. A simple "How can I help you?" or "Who is it?" will usually elicit all the information you need to decide if you want to have a face to face conversation. This places the occupant in strong control of the situation, and the visitor in a clearly inferior and off balance position without giving direct offense. If there isn't a good reason to open the door (defined as something of benefit to you from someone you have reason to trust inside your reactionary gap) the general rule is - you don't, and you advise the caller you do not wish to conduct business or carry on further conversation with him. The advantages of this procedure are considerable:

- You don't have to get dressed to answer the door after you've gone to bed
- The individual doesn't know what you look like or where you are
- You can conduct the interview from a position with easy access to defensive tools and your safe room
- You have announced that you are inside, which is a "no go" condition for burglars screening for unoccupied premises
- There is no opportunity to conduct a push-in invasion because the door remains locked
- You have effectively communicated that you are aware of risks, have taken precautions, and quite likely have a plan if the situation escalates
- You have maintained distance that buys you reaction time to activate your home invasion plan if a violent entry is attempted

Bad guys expect things to go as they envisioned, and quickly lose enthusiasm for their random crime visions when things go in a direction that suggests they are not in control of the situation and may well find themselves on the wrong end of someone else's tactical plan.

Excaliber

[Greybeard]

Excaliber - That's quite a few words of wisdom for post numero uno.

' Gad ya quit just lurkin' and posted. Welcome to the forum.

[Excaliber]

Thanks, Greybeard. I'm looking forward to making contributions where I can, and continuing to learn from the forum's many thoughtful contributors.

[JDKRIEK]

Very nice Ex, welcome to the forum!

[bdickens]

Excaliber, you bring up some good points.

When I told my wife about this guy, she asked be a bunch of specific questions and had me give the first answer off the top of my head, without thinking about or judging the answers. It's a technique she has for intuiting a situation.
I'm trying to get her to write down the exchange as she remembers it because it could be very instructive.

What it boils down to is:
1) his body language told me this guy wasn't an immediate threat.
2) he would not be violent unless backed into a corner.
3) he is more likely to be an opportunist, rather than planning a crime in advance.
4) he has been around here before, but is not employed at the business next door.


I've always been one to size up a potential threat and to deal with it confidently, quickly and agressively. I opened the door because I thought it was one of the upstairs neighbors, who knocks exactly like this guy did.

[Excaliber]

For what it's worth, I personally like to do an "after action review" on situations that could have gone badly (as well as ones that actually did go south). To learn as much as I can, I examine both my own experiences and those encountered by others, and welcome feedback from anyone with good horse sense and an inquiring mind. My goal is to identify what went right and what went wrong, how much of the result was due to good tactics and how much to dumb luck, and, most importantly, what things that are within my control could be done better next time a similar situation is encountered.

When I apply this methodology to the situation you described, the items below are the major points I come up with as my personal "lessons learned." I offer them as thoughts for consideration only and not as criticisms of how you handled the situation because you were there, and I wasn't. You and the other forum members may disagree with some or all of my observations, but I think situations like this offer great opportunities to learn from each other and improve how we approach the future without having to learn everything directly from experience, which is colloquially defined as "what you get when you don't get what you want." I, for one, don't have enough time left on the planet to make all the mistakes required by that approach.

My thoughts on the situation described in the post are:

1. The described setting of the home gives it limited natural observation support from the roadway and neighboring residences. Actions that would risk drawing attention in a community where single family residences were closely spaced and located within 50 feet of the roadway (e.g., breaking glass, kicking in doors, firing gunshots) can be carried out here with little risk. Countermeasures for this location need to include provisions for these contingencies.

2. The visitor screening process as described in the original post appears to have consisted of matching the sound of the stranger's knock on the door against the knocking patterns used by persons familiar to the homeowner, and the initial conclusion about the identity of the caller in fact turned out to be false. It's important to recognize that it was the result of an assumption loosely tied to a familiar circumstance with insufficient information to draw a valid conclusion, and is an example of the fact that people default to placing uncertain situations into the framework of the familiar rather than examining them closely for their unique characteristics. This is something we all do, and need to consciously guard against, because incorrect conclusions about the identity of persons at the door can be hazardous to your health.

3. The four rapid assessment observations you made ( described in your latest entry) which led you to conclude that the subject did not present an immediate deadly threat appear to have been based on information that only became available after the door was opened. This left you deep in the vulnerability red zone at that moment. The fact that no attack occurred was due to the lack of immediate deadly intent carried by the stranger on your doorstep, with the potential that his decision was influenced in some way by your appearance and demeanor. IMHO, This falls more under good luck than sound tactics. Luck is often sufficient when we're not faced with a determined opponent. When we do face that circumstance, good tactics (like keeping the door locked and using a wireless intercom for the interview process) brighten the outlook for our future considerably.

4. If the situation had involved a different unknown subject with serious malevolent plans, the observations that "he's armed, he's not alone, and he's (pick one: shooting / stabbing / punching) right now" as you opened the door and stood in the doorway would have realistically left little room for successful resolution through your previously honed skills at quick, confident, aggressive action, even with a holstered Glock 19 on your person. For an example of how these situations can turn out, see this relatively recent incident from North Richland Hills:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... d95d3.html

5. When you stepped outside and followed the path the subject had taken, did you maintain a disciplined 360 degree scan in the recognition that criminals often work in pairs or small groups, or did you leave yourself vulnerable to being surprised from behind?

6. While you were outside, were other persons still in the residence? If so, had you alerted them to the situation so they could safely respond if the subject had gone around to the rear and kicked in the door, or an accomplice had approached the front door you had exited? Was their safety potentially compromised by your decision to go outside? Would remaining inside to maintain a tactical advantage and protect people be a better choice the next time?

7. Were the police notified of the suspicious person / circumstance? If the subject was looking for an unoccupied residence or one where the door was opened by someone old and frail, a potentially preventable crime could have occurred at another location. Police activity and an investigative stop can be a decisive factor. If a crime did occur, your description of the subject might well prove critical to the investigation. I believe our obligation to the community doesn't end when a potential bad guy exits past our property line.

Playing "what if" is a proven productive way to think things through and "program" ourselves to respond in the most advantageous manner during real events in the future. I hope these thoughts will prove useful to you and the rest of the forum members, and I'd be even more pleased if they stimulate further discussion we can all learn from.

[bdickens]

To reply point by point:

1) The limited observability of our location is a two-edged sword. On the one hand it grants us a lot of peace and quiet but on the other hand it does have the potential for sheilding someone's nefarious deeds from observation. We would actually like to have additional screening along the side; my wife likes to work in the front and is sometimes made uncomfortable by some of the foot traffic passing by. I'm not sure what countermeasures we could take for security other tham making the place even more invisible. Our location is almost like a semi-rural enclave sandwiched between a neighborhood and some apartments down the road from us. The street we're on has a bunch of businesses on it with a couple of residences mixed in. 9-5, M-F, the street is fairly well occupied, but after that, it's mosly traffic passing through.

2) You are absolutely correct. The visitor screening process is terribly substandard and unsound. Needs much improvement.

3) Correct again. Probably one of my consistent failings is that I rely too much on my demeanor and chutzpah to diffuse situations instead of sound tactics. Just because I've been lucky so far is no assurance of continued success.

4) Oops!

However, I am the kid who used to get in trouble for "starting" fights that were in fact started by the other kid. When the schoolyard bully would try to intimidate me, I would ask him to just leave me alone. As soon as he started to raise his hands to push me, like kids do, I'd deck him before he got the chance and then keep laying into him until we were seperated. The preemptive strike was my friend! I'd get in loads of trouble, but the kid would never mess with me again. I also didn't have to do that too often.

As an aside, this proclivity of mine now gives me some small consternation which I plan to address in another thread sometime.

5) Check. I kept an eye out all around me. As a matter of course, I try to always remain completely aware of my surroundings.

6) My wife was in the shower. The front door is really the only reasonable way in to the house. There is a 10-foot wooden fence surrounding the side and rear yard areas of the duplex. There is a gate into the back/ side yard but it is on-line with the front of the building and it sticks. It is difficult to open from the inside and nearly impossible from the outside.

7) I can't see notifying the police that some guy who posed no articulatable threat came to my door and committed no crime.

[Excaliber]

You deserve a great deal of credit for making the effort to carefully examine and really think about the many interesting angles to your experience, and I'm sure the next time a stranger shows up on your doorstep you'll be executing a new and improved action plan.

Please allow me a few moments to clarify a couple of things where I didn't effectively communicate what I intended.

The location of your residence and the mixed commercial / residential characteristics of your neighborhood deprives you of the "natural surveillance" that occurs in a close residential community where folks get to know their neighbors and genuinely care about them. Since many of the properties around you are unoccupied after business hours, intruders may well consider it safe to use nonstealthy brute force attacks to gain entrance to your home for a burglary or home invasion because there's no one to see the activity or hear the noise and react to it. Tactics like these applied against standard residential doors often result in a breaching time of only a second or two, which doesn't provide a lot of time for reaction. My recommendations for situations like this include powerful (250 - 500W) motion activated halogen floodlights mounted out of reach from the ground and aimed at the major entry points (doors and low windows). There is a surprise and deterrent effect when the light comes on, and it provides you with some notice as well. You'll have to be prepared to become familiar with the habits of your local populations of armadillos, opossums, rabbits, etc. because these will trip the sensors if the high sensitivity settings are used, but the lights also produce a "deer in the headlights" response from intruders.

Another recommendation is serious attention to reinforcing the doors against forcible intrusion with solid deadbolt locks mated with extra long reinforced strikes held in place by 3 inch screws that mate the strike to the 2 x 4 stud behind the thin door jamb material. Lowe's also sells an adjustable reinforcing bar that is placed between the doorknob and the floor to create a very strong counter to forcible entry. Glass panes can be protected either with Lexan (not plexiglass) or with clear or tinted security film of the type used for hurricane or blast protection. (e.g. Armorcoat). Audible alarm systems with notification to a central station are highly recommended. They don't stop entries, but they do let you know something is wrong and they encourage burglars to depart sooner than they do in premises that are not equipped with these systems.

Your description of the preemptive strike as an antidote to schoolyard bullying brought back fond memories and a couple of chuckles from long ago. It's still a viable option under some very limited circumstances, but there are lots of other situations where that approach may not produce the results we want. Most of us need at least a handful of other arrows in the quiver. My own tactical plans fall into the following general categories:

1) Avoid trouble. See it before it sees you and find somewhere else to be.
2) Evade trouble that comes looking for you. Predators don't make a final commitment to action until they are just a few steps away. If you can see them approaching, you can maintain distance, run, or take other evasive action. When you do this in time, they will most often break off pursuit and look for another victim (unless their issue with you is really personal).
3) Engage trouble you can't get away from. This runs the gamut from warning a rapidly approaching stranger not to come closer all the way through the full range of use of force options.
4) Escape. This includes everything from how you move out of range of effective attack, to reporting the issue to law enforcement, and handling the legal aftermath.

Your reaction to considering reporting what happened to law enforcement is very common, and unfortunately contributes to a lot of bad guys getting away with crimes, even though they were observed at some point by good guys. Let's think about this a little more for a second. You considered the stranger's behavior, request, and post encounter disappearance to be suspicious enough to report it as a probable "interview" or precrime recon on this forum, and other contributors agreed. I concur as well. What is not well recognized is that when you observe something like what happened in your experience here, you're looking at just a small piece of an event sequence that looks a lot different to the police.

To give you an example, a number of years ago I was having Christmas dinner at my wife's grandmother's home quite some distance from where we lived. I looked out the window and saw 3 young males horsing around on the sidewalk several houses up the street. I also noticed that they were paying an inordinate amount of attention to the houses and people around them, rather than to each other. I asked Grandma if she recognized them from the neighborhood. She didn't. I called the local PD, described what I had seen, and expressed concern that they were up to no good. The PD responded with a low profile approach and observation. About 20 minutes later the 3 subjects were arrested in the process of breaking into a house a short distance away.

The stranger at your door may have just needed a cab, but he had to have come from somewhere. Why didn't he call from there or with his cell phone? (Everybody has a cell phone these days, don't they?) Then again, your visitor may have wanted a cab because his getaway driver got spooked while he took a little too long inside during a house burglary. Or, your visitor may have been looking for a good candidate for a push-in home invasion, and while you didn't fit the bill, he may have kept right on looking and may have found a better victim a block or two away. He may have used similar tactics on other occasions (bad guys tend to repeat anything that works until it doesn't). The police may already have been looking for him for other crimes, or your encounter may give them an investigative lead for something that happened later. You would be astonished how often officers canvassing a neighborhood after a crime hear stories like yours, followed by "but I didn't think anything of it at the time." Excaliber's rule here is "Better one call too many than one call too few." If you can articulate circumstances that lead you to suspect a subject is up to no good, as you clearly did here, go ahead and make the call. Well motivated and well led officers will always be appreciative that you made the effort, and you'll be surprised how many times a call like that is the difference between a bad guy getting caught or getting away with something that caused loss, injury, and heartache to a member of your community.