News Alert
Police: Victim in Apartment Complex Shooting May…

Police Release 911 Tape Reporting Duluth Shooting

Woman shot, killed intruder who confronted her with knife in her home as she exited shower.

Gwinnett Police have released a recording of the 911 call made by a Duluth woman after she shot the knife-wielding intruder who attacked her at home last Wednesday (May 11). Her assailant, identified by police as Israel Perez Puentes, 34, of Alpharetta, died later from the gunshot wounds.

The incident occurred about 6:30 a.m. when Punetes entered the home in the 2800 block of East Mount Tabor Circle in unincorporated Duluth, as the resident, a 53-year-old woman, was coming out of the shower, according to a Gwinnett Police spokesman. "She was exiting the shower when the man wielding a [kitchen] knife entered her bathroom," said Gwinnett Police spokesman Cpl. Edwin Ritter.

The woman tried to fight off the man with the shower rod after she had fallen into the bathtub. Her attacker then forced her into the bedroom. Puentes apparently was going to sexually assault her, Ritter said. She was able to retrieve her .22-caliber pistol and then shot him multiple times, according to Ritter. Puentes left the house through the rear door and collapsed in the backyard.

A neighbor to whose home the woman had run after the attack placed the 911 call then put her on the telephone. Sobbing hysterically, she managed to tell the dispatcher about the attack and give her address.

“I was in the shower and the lights cut out in my house, and a man came in with a hood, and he had a knife in his hand….He told me to be quiet. He told me to get out of the tub, and he tried to force me on(to) the bed,” the woman told the police dispatcher.  

The woman was able to retrieve a .22 caliber pistol that she kept in a nightstand near the bed. “I took my .22, and I shot him as much as I could.” The woman informed the dispatcher she locked the rear sliding glass door after he ran out, and she rushed out the front door to the neighbor’s house. She said she wasn’t sure of his whereabouts.

Puentes was transported to Gwinnett Medical Center in Lawrenceville where he later died from his injuries. The woman was transported to Gwinnett Medical Center in Duluth and was treated for minor injuries, Ritter said. No charges are expected to be filed against the woman. “It was apparently a justified use of deadly force," he said.

Lilburn Patch Editor Scott Bernarde created the video accompanying this article and added excerpts from the audio tape. The approximate nine-minute audio tape was edited to three minutes. Peachtree Corners-Berkeley Lake Patch Editor Judy Putham wrote the initial story on the attack, parts of which were used in this article, and took photographs of the crime scene.

wllharrington May 22, 2011 at 02:51 PM
I was born and bred in Mass.. I left. I hope you never have to shoot an intruder and get charged with murder if he dies, 'assault with inten' if he doesn't . You will go in front of a judge who will tell you that the "back to the wall doctrine applies" and because you did not go into the cellar or backyard to get away in hopes that the intruder has left you are guilty of murder. Meanwhile the poor person you shot or his family sues you for committing a criminal act.
scott May 22, 2011 at 03:00 PM
Here's an injustice that is happening in Oklahoma right now....http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-pharmacist-faces-murder-charge-in-shooting/article/3372941
Jo May 22, 2011 at 03:05 PM
It's Sunday, and as I am getting ready for church, the facts in this article bother me. Either this woman was really lucky or the devil wanted this man's soul before he repented. What if he knocked her out or led her to living room? Her butt would have been done for then. I hope the police did their job and investigated this to verify all the facts. It's just too clean. How do we know if she decided to seek revenge on a burglar? Where was her husband? He appeared by magic after the act to try to cover her up with a towel. "She" shot the perp nine times or was it her husband? Crime scenes may be staged. Oh, by the way, the cops said that they were looking for other victims, but it was not known to be any at this moment. One way to stop burglars and theft is education and get harsh on the selling of illegal drugs.
Dave May 22, 2011 at 03:24 PM
To the lady that pulled the trigger, please do not victimize yourself by thinking about killing a person. He lost the right to consideration when he violated your right to be secure in your home. He had a choice. Further on the subject, “Gun control” should mean that your hand does not shake and scatter bullets around the room. Learn how to use your weapon. Keep the bullets on target and empty the gun into the perp. Just the presence of the STRANGER in YOUR house should be sufficient to justify defensive action. Whose fault is it anyway if the low life picked the wrong house to victimize. It takes a second to save your life it may take years to go through the legal process of explaining why you had to take the law in your hands. Of course we should think about the low life that tried to violate your rights. Any such law suits by the victims relatives should be barred. Criminals should understand it is criminal to violate another's person and premises. If they do, they are subject to death at the hands of the law abiding resident of the house the criminal attempted to violate. People should not be defenseless in their own homes. If criminals think that EVERY HOUSE might have an ARMED, TRAINED OCCUPANT, the criminals might choose another lifestyle. EDUCATE children at the root. They will not grow up to be criminals. Entitlement is not the answer. Teach children to be responsible and to EARN THEIR REWARDS. The "reward" for violating a woman against her will is death!
Jeff May 22, 2011 at 03:25 PM
My hat is off to you. I have this feeling you are a good woman, a woman any man would be proud to be with, any child proud to have as a parent, any community proud to have a a member. As such I believe I'll only make two suggestions: You actually don't need a bigger gun, just hotter ammo. Buy twenty-two magnum, hollow points--that'll "get er dun" and do something for him he wouldn't have done for you. Pray for his eternal soul. You did what you had to do. Now it's up to Our Loving God to sort out the one's He wishes to keep from those He doesn't. He should thank you for the free ticket home. And, you sent him "first class". That's better then INS would've done either in hie previous journey's or future one's--of which, for him, they're will be none. Further, in our time of conserving fuel, look it as doing your part in not having to ship another busload home. I know, they didn't say he was an illegal. But in our liberal news media, you can rest assurred if he wasn't, that's would have been all over the front pages as a sale call by an unemployed gardner goes awray. Thought for the day.... Calling an illegal alien an 'undocumented immigrant' is like calling a drug dealer an 'unlicensed pharmacist'
Robert May 22, 2011 at 03:41 PM
Good for her. Support the 2nd Amendment. Vote out anyone that wants to end our 2nd Amendment rights.
Pam J May 22, 2011 at 05:02 PM
I just looked at the video. I'm not sure about this one. Did he shoot one of the guys outside the store? If so, maybe that wasn't right. And he just walked over and shot the other guy, who you couldn't see but apparently laying on the floor. If he had shot them when they first came in pointing a gun at him, I would have had no problem with him shooting them. I don't think he should be charged with murder, but I'm not sure he should be completely exonerated.
Robert Scott May 22, 2011 at 05:50 PM
If you are going to keep a gun for self-defense, learn gun safety, (2 year old shot himself to death in Ashland, KY today's paper), be completely familiar with its operation and find a place to practice with it. Shoot it as often as you can. If you have a concealed carry permit, give careful thought as to the best and safest way to carry it and practice getting it into action quickly (practice with it unloaded). And once again know everything there is to know about safe gun storage, handling and shooting.
Richard Rider, Chairman, SD Tax Fighters May 22, 2011 at 06:24 PM
The only thing this woman did wrong was she purchased too small a caliber weapon. A .22 takes too many rounds to bring down an attacker. I suspect she'll now get a bigger handgun. Even a 9mm is far superior to a .22.
Postone May 22, 2011 at 06:35 PM
Good job lady!
Ari - From Helsinki, Finland May 22, 2011 at 07:44 PM
Good job, lady. This is why every law-obedient citizen should have a gun at home. To protect the innocent.
Deborah May 22, 2011 at 08:40 PM
Mossberg 12 ga w/extended clip 7 + 1 pistol grip alternate 3" xx buck, slug, buck, slug, buck, slug..... Id rather call the handy man to fix the damage than spackle and paint after birdshot. I choose to NOT let a criminal thug decide whether I live or die.
joob May 22, 2011 at 09:28 PM
I'd like to see more would be rapists meet the same fate.
wllharrington May 22, 2011 at 11:39 PM
loyd is correct but I think it should go further. She should not only get the money it would have cost for the trial but also some of what it would have cost to support him in prison for a few years, that is , if he got jail time.
wllharrington May 22, 2011 at 11:43 PM
It is not really the size of the gun. Each person should have a gun they can handle and then learn to handle it well. The nice part about a .22 is it bounces around inside and tears the perp up, also, less blood to clean up.
Josh Michiels May 23, 2011 at 12:57 AM
Realy, you got all that from one article? You must be some kind of genius detective. You should probably apply to the FBI.
Carl May 23, 2011 at 01:58 AM
Great argument for those who think keeping a LOADED handgun in the house is dangerous. Kudos to this woman for keeping her calm enough to get to her handgun and defy her own death. Criminals aren't going to wait for you to load your weapon.
T Ro May 23, 2011 at 12:41 PM
For this exact reason everyone should teach themselves some form of self defense!! God bless you girl for what you did and the example you made of that scumbag! Everyone should let these worthless types of people who do this kind of thing to women and crime in general know and truely see that we've had enough!!! As if we don't have enough burden in life between taxes, raising prices on everything, politicians not doing a damn thing for us and budgets being cut for everything including the would be defenders who protect us against situations like these! Now's the time people,,,,,not AFTER SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS!! Know that the best defense is a good, well planned and prepared offense! If we were to pull together, as a community/neighbors we could defeat any and all opposition. Don't let something like what unfortunately happened to this poor woman be the reason why and how you first get to know your neighbors!! Protect each other, stay vigilant, and don't be scared to defend your land and the land and respect of others!! God bless each and every one of you who make a difference each and every day! Today is not to late to start educating and preparing to defend yourself and your loved ones!
Wildfire May 23, 2011 at 04:18 PM
@ Kujani: There is a strong measure of validity in most your comments. “Stuff” is replaceable, a life is not. Treading on your grass, is even less reason to destroy lives, yours and their next of kins’. However, your statement: “As far as the sarcastic comments toward the police, they're immature.” Actually comments like “When seconds count, the police are only minutes away” is totally correct and the commenters are dead on the money. Overwhelmingly when the police arrive, the danger they were called for is over, and the area is safe and secure by they roll up. Look at the Gabby Giffords shooting for example. Research it for yourself: Law enforcement officers HAVE NO DUTY TO PROTECT INDIVIDUALS. (Emphasis, not shouting.) The main job of law enforcement is to generate revenue for the Government (City, County, State or Federal), and write incident reports after the crime is over for insurance companies. Everyone should ask themselves this: Why should a cop risk his life, to save something so insignificant (your life or the lives of your loved ones), that even the owner is unwilling to protect it?
Wildfire May 23, 2011 at 04:31 PM
@ Terry I disagree with you slightly. I believe anyone walking our streets as a Freeman/Freewoman should be able to do so armed. "Oh but what about the criminals and crazies?!" If someone is a menace to society, whether due to mental illness or criminal behavior: They should not be allowed to walk our streets as a Freeman, they should be locked-up.
Kujani May 23, 2011 at 07:19 PM
@ Wildfire No duty to protect individuals? Tell that to the 140 plus officers families that will be killed this year. Police may not be there when everything happens, but by them showing up and conducting investigations they arrest thousands of criminals a year that would be free to commit more crimes. You really have no idea how the police do their job and it's obvious. That's not an insult, but you really should be more respectful of things you don't understand before you make judgements. Are the police to blame because they get called 2 minutes after someone was shot and it takes them 5 minutes to get there? The comment I was referring to was about it was nice of the police not to charge her. I agree with the rest of them. It's impossible for the police to be everywhere at once and that shouldn't be held against them. I had a lot of respect for you comments until you fell back on ole reliable "generate income." It may generate income but less than 5% goes to the police. The rest goes toward the government employees and running the county or city.
Jo May 24, 2011 at 04:26 AM
I think you are silly. She had a lot of luck or the devil wanted that guy's soul. What if he had taken her to the living room or knocked her out? Some details of her story seem fishy. I still wonder if her and hubby decided to get revenge and kill a burglar. Most rapists and serial killers stalk their victims. By the time that they kill or rape their intended victims, they make sure that everything is according to plan. Most serial deadly rapists get caught after they have committed numerous rapes. If you use deadly force, they will use deadly force and catch you unaware. Tell me, Peggy, there are no scumbags in your family? We need more education to help people not commit crimes but get better jobs.
Jo May 24, 2011 at 04:27 AM
Speak for yourself not for all Americans. She should have locked her doors.
Jo May 24, 2011 at 04:29 AM
Why? "Those who live by the sword; will die by the sword."
Joseph May 24, 2011 at 02:10 PM
Jo - because those who beat their swords into plowshares end up plowing for those who don't. Suzanna Hupp's story is what prompted me to get my carry permit - I resolved that what happened to her and her parents was not going to happen to me or those I care about if I could help it. That's why. http://www.gunownersalliance.com/hupp-10.htm
Wildfire May 25, 2011 at 05:23 PM
@ Kujani You state: “Tell that to the 140 plus officers families that will be killed this year.” Where did you get the number “140 plus”? In 2010 only 64 officers died in the line of duty. I seem to have missed what your statement has to do with the subject You ask: “Are the police to blame because they get called 2 minutes after someone was shot and it takes them 5 minutes to get there?” Where do the police have a 5 minute response time? Doesn’t logic and reason suggest that if the police NEED a gun when they eventually arrive “on scene”, the victims responsible for the call in the first place, needed guns as well? Look at Virginia Tech, most of the 32 victims were murdered AFTER the police were “on scene”. The same for Columbine, where the police TRAPPED the children WITH the murderers. You state: “I had a lot of respect for you comments until you fell back on ole reliable ‘generate income’.” Facts don’t change, just because they “sound bad”. You confirm my post: “It may generate income but less than 5% goes to the police. The rest goes toward the government employees and running the county or city.” My post stated: “The main job of law enforcement is to GENERATE REVENUE FOR THE GOVERNMENT (City, County, State or Federal), and write incident reports after the crime is over for insurance companies.” (Caps used for emphasis only.) Now, care to show where I was incorrect in my statement? (Part 1)
Wildfire May 25, 2011 at 05:25 PM
(Part 2) Things may have changed since my time as a deputy with the same force that my dad retired from after 35 year, however here's just a few examples of what the courts have consistently ruled: Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982) (no federal constitutional requirement that police provide protection) Calogrides v. Mobile, 475 So. 2d 560 (Ala. 1985); Cal Govt. Code 845 (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Calogrides v. Mobile, 846 (no liability for failure to arrest or to retain arrested person in custody) Davidson v. Westminster, 32 Cal.3d 197, 185, Cal. Rep. 252; 649 P.2d 894 (1982) (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Stone v. State 106 Cal.App.3d 924, 165 Cal Rep. 339 (1980) (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C.App. 1983) (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C.App 1981) (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Sapp v. Tallahassee, 348 So.2d 363 (Fla. App. 1st Dist.), cert. denied 354 So.2d 985 (Fla. 1977); Ill. Rec. Stat. 4-102 (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Keane v. Chicago, 98 Ill. App.2d 460, 240 N.E.2d 321 (1st Dist. 1968) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Wildfire May 25, 2011 at 05:26 PM
(Part 3) Jamison v. Chicago, 48 Ill. App. 3d 567 (1st Dist. 1977) (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Simpson's Food Fair v. Evansville, 272 N.E.2d 871 (Ind. App.) (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Silver v. Minneapolis, 170 N.W.2d 206 (Minn. 1969) (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Wuetrich V. Delia, 155 N.J. Super. 324, 326, 382, A.2d 929, 930 cert. denied 77 N.J. 486, 391 A.2d 500 (1978) (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Chapman v. Philadelphia, 290 Pa. Super. 281, 434 A.2d 753 (Penn. 1981) (no liability for failure to provide police protection) Morris v. Musser, 84 Pa. Cmwth. 170, 478 A.2d 937 (1984) (no liability for failure to provide police protection) “Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others.” -Lynch vs North Carolina Department of Justice 1989 Now, would you please show me where my statement was incorrect? Thank You.
Kujani May 27, 2011 at 01:57 AM
@ Wildfire There were 158 officers killed in the line of duty last year and 72 so far this year. http://www.odmp.org/search. As far as the obligation, that's to protect them against criminal prosecution in case they don't respond appropriately. They can still be held accountable in civil court if they don't respond appropriately. Officers have been sued successfully for inaction. (Tracy Thurman sued her local police department in the 80's and won almost three million dollars. I refer to that one bc I just saw her movie again on television.) You still don't get the role of police, do you? The reason they write reports is to investigate crimes and to make arrests. Fines from traffic tickets is a convience issue. In the 70's, you went to jail if you got stopped for speeding or other traffic violations. Now you can pay a fine if you have license. People have the option to do time in jail in lieu of paying a fine. Fines are the only way short of sending them to jail to punish them. Yes, it does generate revenue but the police don't benefit from it. But that is not their main job, just the same as the main goal of the fire department isn't to put out fires. The main job of the police is to protect the public; that doesn't mean that they can park in everyone's driveway and catch every criminal and solve every crime. Most police are pro-gun ownership by law abiding citizens to protect themselves. It must be tough on you to know everything, though.
Solid Citizen July 27, 2011 at 12:30 PM
It's good she lives in Duluth. New York,Maryland, and New Jersey take extraordinary measures to deny their citizens the right to self defense. he certainly prevented this evil incarnate from perpetrating more crimes When seconds count, the police are minutes away. . Below is a story about an unarmed woman…. Yvette Beakes, a Glen Burnie resident, was abducted and murdered in 2001. A witness to the abduction called 911, but miscommunication by the County call center resulted in the information never making its way to police. The County’s defense? “As harsh as it may be, the Constitution simply doesn’t impose on government a duty to provide any sort of minimal service to its citizens,” offered Assistant County Attorney Andrew J. Murray. That’s right, according to the County, a police officer witnessing a crime in progress has no obligation to assist a victim unless s/he has actually agreed to help. Quo warranto, B.O.?


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »