So the above was from the actual ran story correct ?
And we're all pissed because of semantics ? I don't see anyone condemning the homeowner for what he did in the above, as a matter of fact I see the opposite. The officer/paper just used a less than desirable term for the offender, yet their actual statements are absolving the homeowner of wrongdoing. Maybe run an apology about the term "victim", but I wouldn't get all pissy about it. Or maybe they just forgot the "" around the word "victim".