Local News

Homeowner who shot pair shouldn't have had gun

Posted March 14, 2015
Updated March 15, 2015

Map Marker  Find News Near Me


— The Fayetteville homeowner who shot two men breaking into his residence was himself charged with gun possession Saturday, authorities said.

Harold Williams, 42, was home when Roy Lee Hawk, 27, and Martize Douglas, 23, forcibly broke into his home at 517 Mayview Street Friday just before 5:15 p.m.

Williams shot the two men with a handgun as they entered the home, however Hawk was unable to flee the residence due to his injuries. Douglas was able to run from the home, but arrived at a hospital less than two hours later, authorities said.

Hawk was listed in critical condition on Saturday, and Douglas was listed in serious condition.

Both suspects were charged with common law robbery, breaking and entering and felonious conspiracy. Hawk and Douglas were also on active GPS monitoring through NC probation patrol, investigators said.

Williams was charged with possession firearm by a convicted felon.

According to investigators, the home invasion and robbery was not a random act.

All three involved have criminal histories, including Williams' long list of offenses that include drug charges and Hawk's convictions for robbery with a dangerous weapon and conspiracy to commit robbery in connection with the 2008 murder of a Fort Bragg soldier outside a nightclub.

Anyone with information is asked to contact police at 910-916-2764.

The incident remains under investigation.


Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • Dan May Mar 16, 2015
    user avatar

    As they say: better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. I guess that rings true sometimes.

  • Kaitlyn Legare Mar 16, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread

    I hope you are not one of those people who are always complaining about how ineffective gun laws are, because it's attitudes like yours that helps to undermine these laws. Whatever happened to the idea of getting tough on criminals who use guns? This guy was a convicted felon who illegally possessed a gun. If it was up to me I would toss him right back in prison, and if they could find out who sold or gave that felon a gun I would throw them in prison right alongside him, and take way their right to ever possess a gun too.

  • Timmy Strickland Mar 15, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread

    as a convicted felon you cannot have any weapons in your home

  • Clovis Sangrail Mar 15, 2015
    user avatar

    "shouldn't have had gun"the facts disagree

  • Sarcoi Dosis Mar 15, 2015
    user avatar

    Tough one.. Felons should not own guns. Then again, this man would be dead if he didn't have one. If one speculates even further, his home may not have been invaded if he didn't have particular "interests".
    Maybe Felons should invest in a Big Dog, or good home Alarm system since they gave up their rights to own firearms in exchange for a life of crime.

  • Lee Roy Mar 15, 2015
    user avatar

    A .44 ball and cap revolver would have done the trick.

  • Walter Smirth Mar 15, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread

    Your harsh opinion of the police is unwarranted.

  • Matt Thompson Mar 15, 2015
    user avatar

    I don't feel sorry for this guy. His felony record goes back to 1989 to 2013 for numerous b&e felonies and possession of stolen good felonies. Sounds like karma was kicking in his door

  • James Hicks Mar 15, 2015
    user avatar

    On a side note, I'm pretty impressed with NC so far. There's been a large number of these home invasions recently, and I hear more stories of dead or injured criminals than I do of their successes.

  • James Hicks Mar 15, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread

    Oddly enough I was just discussing jury nullification just the other day with some friends to make sure they knew about it. I would find it hard to convict the poor guy myself. Hard, but not impossible. It really depends on the specifics of the case.

    For instance, it's mentioned that this was not a random act. That means the suspects knew and targeting this particular individual on purpose... which could mean they were looking for anything from drugs to a large sum of cash. Now, if his previous felonies were violent, and he was still selling drugs, then by all means he shouldn't have a weapon. Short of that, he should not be charged.

    There was once a belief that once you served your time, your debt to society has been paid, and your rights are restored. Barring the aforementioned violent crimes, those rights should include bearing arms.