Local News

82-year-old tied up during Durham home invasion

Posted August 17, 2010

Map Marker  Find News Near Me

— An 82-year-old Durham woman told police she was tied up Tuesday morning after two people broke into her home and robbed her.

Police were dispatched at 4:51 a.m. to a house in the 3800 block of Hillgrand Drive, where, the victim said, a man and woman kicked in her back door and took electronics, firearms and jewelry before restraining her.

The two fled in the victim's 2002 tan four-door Cadillac DeVille with North Carolina license plate XTK-1423, Durham police said.

According to a 911 recording released Tuesday afternoon, the suspects knocked the victim in the head and tied her with duct tape and covered her with a blanket so she couldn't see. She was able to escape to a neighbor's for help about 20 minutes after the suspects left.

"She came over here with a chair attached to her," the neighbor said in the call.

The woman was taken to Duke University Hospital, where she was treated for injuries and released.

"She's a little battered and bruised and confused, but she is doing good," said the victim's daughter, Pamela Roberts. "She's doing as well as can be expected."

Detailed descriptions of the suspects were not available, but investigators are asking that anyone with information call Durham police at 919-560-4583, ext. 29364, or Crime Stoppers at 919-683-1200.

Crime Stoppers pays cash rewards for information leading to arrests in felony cases. Callers do not have to identify themselves.

"I'm angry that these people think they have the right to come into someone else's home in the early-morning hours and do this to an 82-year-old person," Roberts said.

25 Comments

This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • Mr. Middle of the Road Aug 17, 2010

    Good thing she had firearms to protect her. Now they are in the hands of bad guys.

  • turkeydance Aug 17, 2010

    for justacceptit: of course....but we're talking about Money and
    Time even AFTER it's ruled justifiable in criminal court. bottom line: anyone can sue/indict a Ham Sandwich,
    but it will Cost them. the Castle Doctrine short-circuits that.
    if the criminal case is ruled in the shooters favor: any civil charges against the shooter are thrown out. done and done.
    no more wasted money no more wasted time.

  • WhatYaGonnaDoNow Aug 17, 2010

    @turkeydance - If that happens, can't the person who was forced to defend themselves counter sue? If not the idiot's family at least against his estate what there may be of it? Plus, if the idiot(s) had a record why couldn't they sue the family for knowing his criminal past and not doing enough to counter it?

  • Hammerhead Aug 17, 2010

    "Ah yes, Durham. The crime ridden city that exports its crime to Chapel Hill so they can kill UNC student presidents. But, of course, as long as they take a stand on the AZ anti-illegal bill, everything is just cheery, right?!"

    Did you see the first two stories above...about the soldier and the Garner women?

  • turkeydance Aug 17, 2010

    current NC self-defense laws are related to criminal offenses.
    NOT civil. self-defense can, could, and sometimes does result
    in the criminal's families filing civil charges (loss of
    civil rights, loss of income, etc.) against the defendant.
    meaning: a self-defender has to hire a lawyer, take time
    off from work, etc. passage of the NC version of the
    Castle Doctrine would eliminate that. why hasn't it passed already? the NC Senate passed it. when it when to the House, Deborah Ross kept it bottled up in her committee never to see the House floor in debate.

  • JAFOinWF Aug 17, 2010

    Ah yes, Durham. The crime ridden city that exports its crime to Chapel Hill so they can kill UNC student presidents. But, of course, as long as they take a stand on the AZ anti-illegal bill, everything is just cheery, right?!

  • hrere3554 Aug 17, 2010

    I agree with rgb because I just graduated with m criminal justice degree and it states the facts clearly. and in this case I would have destroyed them for entering in my house unwelcomed.

  • rgb Aug 17, 2010

    Just for clarification for the purpose of enlightening those who think they know the law:
    North Carolina's Use of deadly physical force against an intruder is as follows:.

    (a) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence is justified in using any degree of force that the occupant reasonably believes is necessary, including deadly force, against an intruder to prevent a forcible entry into the home or residence or to terminate the intruder's unlawful entry (i) if the occupant reasonably apprehends that the intruder may kill or inflict serious bodily harm to the occupant or others in the home or residence, or (ii) if the occupant reasonably believes that the intruder intends to commit a felony in the home or residence.

    (b) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence does not have a duty to retreat from an intruder in the circumstances described in this section.

    Please educate yourself before making dumb statements. The laws are very easy to look up. In N

  • The Deadhead Aug 17, 2010

    ....another reason why NC needs a "castle law" which expands on North Carolina Statutory Law: N.C.G.S. 14-51.1.

  • ncwiseguy Aug 17, 2010

    bubbaduke.......

    there aint enough national guard to take care of the problems in durham. the city is a lost cause.

More...