Local News

Wife took out protective order against suspect in Wendell double homicide

Posted April 10
Updated April 16

— Three months ago, Latonya Holden obtained a domestic violence protective order against her estranged husband, Nathan Holden.

Late Wednesday, authorities said, Nathan Holden went to the home of his wife's parents in eastern Wake County, killed his in-laws and seriously wounded his wife. Three children in the home, a 15-year-old boy and two 8-year-old girls, were unharmed.

Latonya Holden, 32, who was in critical condition Thursday at WakeMed in Raleigh, obtained a one-year protective order on Jan. 21, alleging that Nathan Holden had beaten her in the past, hit her son with a broom and told her brother that he planned to kill her, the children and himself.

She moved out of their home and into her parents' home, at 1125 Lake Glad Road near Wendell, but Nathan Holden repeatedly called her and harassed her, threatening to take the children, according to the affidavit attached to the protective order. Her father once called the police when Nathan Horton showed up at the house.

On Tuesday, the estranged couple scheduled a June 9 hearing to resolve child support and custody issues, according to court documents.

Authorities said that Nathan Holden went to the Lake Glad Road home at about 9:45 p.m. Wednesday and opened fire on his in-laws.

Angelia Smith Taylor, 57, was found dead inside the home, and Sylvester Taylor, 66, was found dead in the yard, investigators said.

Latonya Holden and the children called 911 to report the shooting.

"When we arrived they were still on the 911 line," Sheriff Donnie Harrison said Thursday. "You could hear our deputies coming in the house, trying to console them."

Deputies later went to Nathan Holden's home, at 3535 Holden Acres Lane – about 10 miles away from the shooting scene – and used a K-9 unit to track Holden to a nearby field. According to investigators, Holden opened fire on the K-9 handler and other deputies before he was taken into custody at about 3 a.m.

"He was within 100, 150 feet of the house," Harrison said. "The dog picked the track up, and he was sort of lying in ambush. We never got a look at him. ... All they saw was the muzzle blast."

None of the deputies was injured in the incident.

"I'm so thankful none of my guys got hit and thankful he didn't get hit," Harrison said.

Nathan Holden, 31, was charged with two counts of first-degree murder and was being held without bond in the Wake County jail. Investigators said other charges are pending.

The protective order noted that Nathan Holden owns a pistol, but Harrison said the judge who signed it didn't order his deputies to seize the gun.

"I tell everybody, when you take those orders out, it's only a piece of paper, and so it doesn't protect you. I mean, that piece of paper doesn't protect you," the sheriff said. "If he does anything to violate that order, then it gives us the authority to pick him up right then."

That didn't happen in this case.

"He's tore up lives of two different families, and these kids are going to have to live with it for the rest of their lives too. It's sad," Harrison said.

All three children are in the custody of Child Protective Services.

52 Comments

This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • tres1p Apr 11, 3:33 p.m.

    "I tell everybody, when you take those orders out, it's only a piece of paper, and so it doesn't protect you. I mean, that piece of paper doesn't protect you," the sheriff said. What they need to do is to change the law so that it DOES PROTECT YOU..these men knows that it don't mean shyite.. unless an office actually SEE'S THEM DOING ANYTHING... just goes to show who much our government REALLY CARES ABOUT WOMEN..

  • btneast Apr 11, 2:31 p.m.

    [bNonsense. if you passed a deadly weapon on without background check, you should be liable just as if you had sold it][/b]

    And how would someone perform a background check? Even a clean background check is not even remotely close to guaranteeing that the person won't at some time do something bad in the future. My point was everyone wants to lay the blame everywhere except where it belongs. It's not the gun's fault, it's not the fault of whoever had the gun prior to the event....its the fault of whoever pulled the trigger. It would not stand up in ANY court if the person who sold or gave the gun can prove they had no knowledge or connection. Heck , it may have been years in between the gift and any crime. You know, there's a reason that Piers Morgan was sent packing...

  • Grand Union Apr 11, 2:02 p.m.

    "But it STILL comes down to personal responsibility of the perpetrator."

    No. responsibility also lies with those that made it possible. If your carelessness in passing on a gun to someone should not have it, ie someone who has not undergone a full background check, then you too would bear some responsility for the crimes committed using that weapon.

    "Lives can easily be taken with a speeding car(Florida last week),"

    Can bve, but rarely are because its an unreliable way to kill someone, especially if they are in their house!

    " explosives(Oklahoma City), knives (Pennsylvania last week),"

    Explosives are regulated, unpredictable and hence rarely used.

    "airplanes (9/11). "

    Againly highly regulated and rarely used.

    "You would have to know the person you were giving the gun too was going to commit a crime in order to be liable. It's illogical to think otherwise."

    Nonsense. if you passed a deadly weapon on without background check, you should be liable just as if you had sold it.

  • weasel2 Apr 11, 1:51 p.m.

    Its a tragedy that occurs all to often. Protective orders are only one step in the process, unfortunately like so many of our laws, the punishments and ability to keep the suspect in jail or monitored has eroded to a pitiful state. My prayers go out the family and hopefully the law will work in their favor this time.

  • btneast Apr 11, 1:50 p.m.

    just one example

    Yes, but this lady lied on her gun permit forms and supposedly knew she was buying the guns for someone who could not buy them. Of course she has some culpability, that's common sense. Everyone would agree she has some responsibility. What is being argued here is just a gift in general WITHOUT any knowledge of criminal activity. Do you have any idea how many guns are given as presents just at Christmas alone?

  • AtALost Apr 11, 1:39 p.m.

    Some people don't realize that no one can defend them as well as they can. The gun didn't have to be laying around, but I would have setup a plan and code word so the kids knew where to go and I knew the best vantage point to get off a shot. I would have shot this guy on sight the second he violated the protective order and took my chances on a temporary insanity plea.

  • T-ONE Apr 11, 1:36 p.m.

    just one example

    http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20121228/NEWS01/312280028/Webster-suspect-speaks-arrest-imminent

  • btneast Apr 11, 1:34 p.m.

    [bWith great power comes great responsibility and greater power is there than that the power of easily taking someones life?][/b]

    But it STILL comes down to personal responsibility of the perpetrator. Lives can easily be taken with a speeding car(Florida last week), explosives(Oklahoma City), knives (Pennsylvania last week), airplanes (9/11). You would have to know the person you were giving the gun too was going to commit a crime in order to be liable. It's illogical to think otherwise.

  • btneast Apr 11, 12:23 p.m.

    [bYou might want to rethink that one.][/b]

    Nope, he was correct. He differentiated between aiding and abetting through foreknowledge of criminal behavior and just giving someone a gun. Millions of people get guns either as a gift or an inheritance.

  • Grand Union Apr 11, 12:16 p.m.

    "You are not responsible for what your friend does, unless you knew what he was up to when you gave him the gun. My father gave me my grandmother's .38 revolver. What I do with that gun is my responsibility, no one else's."

    That is now the case, but I see no reason why that should continue to be so. With great power comes great responsibility and greater power is there than that the power of easily taking someones life?

More...