Gun Stories Solórzano Vs Lumpkin
With every firearm story, there will be 3 sides. It is not that one person is trying to be deceitful but instead, it is their memory of the event. Emotions and the effects of fight or flight responses that may indeed change what you actually saw or remember. Of course, in the case of Cleto Neri Solorzano Vs Melody Lumpkin, it is eyewitness accounts vs a family’s heartfelt loss. There will never be a winner when a loss of life has occurred, even if that loss of life is preventing the death of another.
Self-Defense is something firearm owners want to avoid at all cost; however, if forced to, they must then choose between letting themselves die or taking a life to survive. Firearm owners are faced with not only having to survive a violent encounter but also the legal, financial, and emotional trauma that follows. The family of the attackers are then left with countless unanswered questions. They must also deal with the emotional loss, and the real desire to find out what happened that took away there loved one. The events of Cleto Neri Solorzano Vs Melody Lumpkin amplifies both sides and shows how neither side came out on top.
We are asking firearm owners to comment and let us know what types of home defense plans you are using. Along with any security measures that you have taken that may prevent a possible attacker from entering your home and changing the course of your life forever. Did your training include a home defense plan or was this something you had to learn later? If you did have to learn this on your own, where did you find the best information?
Cleto Neri Solórzano Vs Melody Lumpkin
As stated by his family, Cleto Neri Solórzano (19), was out with a small gathering of friends on the evening of Saturday April 11th 2020. It is stated that Mr. Solórzano had got into an altercation with a friend when he tried to leave the gathering. He then ran away from the small gathering only to later be found dead. He was inebriated at the time which may help to explain some of the events that transpired. However, the family has been left with unanswered question. For example, Mr. Solórzano truck was found the next day at Marktplatz with the keys in it.
He also had made attempts to call 911 prior to his run in with Curtis Roys (73) and Melody Lumpkin (69). When he was found he had only a cell phone antenna along with his shoes were missing. None of his friends were around or knew where he had gone. It is unclear as to what might have transpired after leaving the gathering with friends and prior to reaching the home of Mr. Roys.
The investigation has ended, and the family is left with the unanswered questions of why, how, and what happened. It appears that Mr. Solórzano had no previous bad acts on his record and is described as a kindhearted, hardworking, person who could light up a room.
Defending Their Home
Mr. Roys woke to a loud banging on what sounded like the outside of his home. When he got up to check out the home, he had noticed an intruder on his back deck. The intruder, Mr. Solórzano, forced his way into the home and started beating Mr. Roys with a blunt object. Mr. Solórzano eventually had knocked Mr. Roys unconscious and unable to defend himself. At which point, Ms. Lumpkin not knowing what Mr. Solórzano was going to do to her and fearing that he was killing Mr. Roys, went for the firearm.
Upon returning with the firearm she noticed Mr. Solórzano had Mr. Roys in a choke hold on the ground. She was yelling for him to stop and then fired a warning shot (which should never be done). Mr. Solórzano ignored her pleas and continued his attack until Ms. Lumpkin fired a final shot to the head of Mr. Solórzano, which killed him. This is not a case where these facts are in dispute.
No charges have been filed against Ms. Lumpkin and the police and prosecutor are satisfied the evidence matches her statements. It is normal to remove a firearm during a homicide investigation even when it is justified. However, this was not done in this case. Instead it was quickly determined that Ms. Lumpkin was in fact right in her actions. Which allowed them to keep the firearm for their defense.
The family is left with not understanding how a normally non-violent teenager ended up at Mr. Roys home that evening. There are many unanswered questions. For example, why did Mr. Solórzano not just drive home like he had planned, when he left the gathering? Why were his keys left in the vehicle? Why was he calling 911 prior to invading Mr. Roys home? What happened to his shoes that evening? Finally, what led him to Mr. Roys home in the first place?
Because the investigation has ended, these are questions the family may never get the answers to. Due to the family’s grief & unanswered questions they have even suggested that there is no proof of Mr. Roys and Ms. Lumpkin’s account of the evening. It is normal to be left distraught, angry, and even devastated after the death of a loved one. It is even harder to grasp when it is out of character and sudden.
Keeping in mind Mr. Roys and Ms. Lumpkin are also dealing with these questions as well. Why did he choose their home, and why did he go to the back rather than the front? Why was he trying to kill Mr. Roys and what would he have done next? They also have to live with the emotional trauma of almost dying and being forced to take a life. The trauma of this event did not end after it was over, instead it was just the beginning for both parties involved.
What makes this even worse for the family is the lack of answers from Mr. Solórzano’s friends that were there that evening. I am by no means suggesting that anyone is covering anything up. Instead, I am saying because no one knows what transpired after he left the gathering. The family can only speculate what might have transpired and are left with wondering how they lost their loved ones.
It is also clear that Ms. Lumpkin did not want to take a life that evening. By firing a warning shot, she could have unintentionally hit someone else outside the home. She was clearly trying to end a violent encounter before she finally fired the lethal shot. She had no way of knowing if Mr. Roys was already dead or just knocked out. He would have died if she had not fired that much is clear. A chokehold only ends one way.
Nobody won here, and this is a clear example of why being able to defend yourself is so important. Even when neither party could imagine the events that would transpire that evening it still happened to them.
We often see victims as numbers on statistical data and think this only happens to someone else or we keep ourselves safe from violence. Never realizing that every one of those numbers are people who live just like us and it can happen even in the safety of our home. It does not matter if your home does not look like it would be worth breaking into or if it seems like an inviting place to get help. A single event can change one person’s life so much that it then creates a ripple effect on others.
Keep in mind in your comments that this is a tragic event for both parties and what we look for here at RGD Reviews, is solutions. Political and hate comments will be deleted. This is not a question of rather anyone was right or wrong in their action. Instead, it is a question of how you have prepared for this type of incident. Do you have a personal and home protection plan in place? If so, what information can you share with others to help them prepare? How much time do spend on practicing your plan? What element of the plan do you feel gives you the best chance of survival?
Keeping in mind a more organized attacker would have likely been able to stop Ms. Lumpkin from reaching a firearm. It is important to also understand that during an attack you will also only have seconds to make a decision. Spur of the moment decisions can often be wrong when you are not prepared.
Finally, we are not judging the actions of either party in this case. In the end, there were very few options and even fewer options that could have prepared them for the events that transpired. Just the fact that Mr. Solórzano was inebriated completely changes his rational thoughts. There could have been many events that took place prior to reaching Mr. Roys’s home that could have also attributed to his violent actions. What is clear, is one victim barely survived and one victim became an attacker and did not survive.