Pittsfield Township homeowner will not be charged in shooting, prosecutors rule
After spending the night drinking at a Detroit casino, Michael Rajchel drove to a Pittsfield Township home intent on killing the homeowner, investigators say.
Instead, Adam Farha shot Rajchel nine times the morning of Dec. 2 as children waited at a nearby bus stop.
Washtenaw County prosecutors have ruled the case justifiable homicide and say all the evidence in the case points to self-defense. Farha, the homeowner police say Rajchel intended to kill, will not be charged with any crimes.
The shooting occurred the morning of Dec. 2 outside a home on Rockport Court in Pittsfield Township.
New details emerged today as Pittsfield Township police released the findings of toxicology results and other evidence that supports Farha's self-defense assertion.
Farha, who lived at 2361 Rockport Court in the Arbor Creek subdivision, was home the morning of Dec. 2 when Rajchel showed up at his house about 8:30 a.m.
When Farha walked out of his garage, Rajchel ordered him to get in his vehicle and drive away, Pittsfield Public Safety Director Matt Harshberger said. Farha and Rajchel both got in Farha's car, but when Farha refused to drive away, Rajchel showed a Norinco semi-automatic pistol tucked in his waistband and began to reach for it, police said.
"At that point, (Farha) felt threatened and that his life was in danger," Harshberger said. "He was firing as he was jumping out of the driver's side of his vehicle."
Farha, who obtained a concealed weapons permit on May 19, 2009, shot Rajchel nine times with a Smith & Wesson pistol, police said. Rajchel died in the passenger's seat of Farha's vehicle with the pistol tucked in his waistband - its hammer cocked back and ready to fire, police said.
Toxicology reports showed Rajchel had a blood alcohol level of 0.12 - above the legal limit of 0.08 at which a person is considered driving drunk. He also had prescription medication in his system, police said.
The two men had some type of business relationship, but exactly what it was is unclear, Harshberger said. Also not known is why Rajchel visited Farha's house that morning and where he planned to go with him.
Police said in a press release that they put together a detailed timeline of the case, which "led investigators to numerous locations, including Detroit, Southfield and Belleville."
Police said they received "credible evidence that Michael Rajchel drove to the home of Adham Farha with the stated intent to kill Farha."
Farha could not be reached for comment, and no attorney information was available.
Farha was arrested the morning of the shooting and was then released as police continued to investigate. The case was resubmitted to prosecutors for review March 15, and the findings were released today.
Deputy Chief Assistant Prosecutor Steven Hiller said prosecutors reviewed all the evidence and closed the case without charges Tuesday. He said the burden would be on prosecutors to prove that it was not self-defense if charges had been brought.
"We found there was insufficient evidence to prove this was not self-defense," Hiller said.
Comments
racerx
Thu, Apr 1, 2010 : 3:12 a.m.
The motive of why still isn't answered. Unless the police are intentionally witholding this information, of which I hope is the case, then why close it without knowing what the motive is/was.
Ricebrnr
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 5:22 p.m.
The Castle Doctrine gives the benefit of the doubt to the homeowner that is forced to defend themselves. This is as it should be and is what happenned as shown by "We found there was insufficient evidence to prove this was not self-defense," Hiller said." As with everyone else, innocent until proven guilty. Just because Mr. Farha had to defend himself on his property with a gun instead of a kitchen knife, baseball bat or chair does not make it any less so. Would we even be having this conversation if it was with any of those other items?
Michisbest
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 4:18 p.m.
There is something seriously wrong here. There is way more to the story than is being told. One of these guys (I think it was the deceased) was on TV this past year when he found a baby in a dumpster by a party store. "Police don't know the relationship" come on.
Skeet
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 4:10 p.m.
this doesn't seem like the end of the story...
John of Saline
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 3:46 p.m.
Eric, the "root cause" was one fellow drove to someone's house with a weapon and reached for it. The guy at the house didn't wait around to find out what his guest had in mind. That's it.
tdw
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 3:15 p.m.
Ok folks, yes people who get shot can drop in their tracks,yes people who get shot can continue to attack you never know. It is not uncommon at all for a full mag to be emptied, the shooter often does'nt even realize it. Been there, seen it,done it
Umich2008
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 3:13 p.m.
jcj common sense and experience. accept it or don't. your choice. Anonymous makes a good technical/legal point. But when you pull out an automatic machine gun or a handgun, you are not making the distinction between killing, stopping, or wounding. SO yes, you are trying to stop the immediate threat. But my point earlier is you are not shooting to wound or stop. That is what you tell the cops and prosecutor. The only 3 things you are told to say after a shooting is 1) i was in fear for my life 2) i shot to stop, and 3) i want my lawyer. but number 2 is for legal purposes only.
jcj
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 2:47 p.m.
Umich2008 Just for some background. Where did you get you expertise? Have you ever shot someone? Have you ever been shot? If the answer to either of the last 2 questions is yes I will deffer to you.
Anonymous Due to Bigotry
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 2:38 p.m.
It's possible for someone on PCP or other drugs to have their heart completely destroyed but still stay conscious for something like 4 seconds or more. That's an eternity for someone to pull out their weapon and start shooting. (I used to be in IDPA and could shoot three man sized targets in their center of mass, twice each, in about that time, and that's not even considered very good.) Also: "If blood flow is completely cut off from the brain, a human still has enough oxygenated blood in their brain for 1015 seconds of willful action[1], though with rapidly decreasing effectiveness as the victim begins to lose consciousness." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stopping_power The goal of shooting someone isn't to kill, wound, cause pain, punish the attacker etc, it's to stop them from doing whatever threatening action they are taking. Everything else is a side effect of that. Unfortunately even one solid shot to someone's center of mass can still give them enough time to draw a weapon and get off several shots of their own. The biggest problem with perceptions of gun combat is that people watch stupid dramatizations on TV and in movies and then think that such fakery represents reality, but it doesn't. People in reality don't fly up in the air backwards, yell "uuuuuuuugh!" and immediately collapse when they get shot like they do on TV.
Eric
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 2:31 p.m.
Given the public resources(money, etc.), anguish and disruption in the lives of the kids that witnessed this shooting and their families, the disruption at Lawton Elementary school, etc., why would this case be closed and determination of innocense be made before importatnt details like what the relationship between these two men was exactly? Also shouldn't it be determined and reported why the man came to the shooters house that morning, and where he intented to take the home owner. If we don't want our society to turn into the wild west than the police should strive for a root cause of this violence. Looks to me like the Pittsfield Police are stopping short of a complete investigation. The people affected by this violent event deverve more information.
dading dont delete me bro
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 2:25 p.m.
i give up. you are right, i am wrong. i don't know a darn thing.
Umich2008
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 2:16 p.m.
dading has never seen what a gun can or can't do up close. there are not an all stopping force. you can empty a magazine into someone and still have a viable threat coming at you. As long as the heart is still pumping, you can be hurt. If you have to shoot someone, it is to kill them, not stop them. Sure, that's what you are supposed to say. But in reality, if you pull your gun it is for one reason and one reason alone-to kill someone. If you don't intend to kill them, don't pull it.
jcj
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 2:11 p.m.
All I said was I doubt if Adam Farha was surprised that Michael Rajchel had a gun. Maybe my post didn't go through. This was in response to. "He was at really close range, and he was freaking out (having not expected to see the fellow brandish a gun)" Given the tone of other post I certainly don't think my comment was off topic!I will know shortly if the censor police are extra sensitive today.
Lokalisierung
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 1:48 p.m.
"We welcome constructive debate on our site, but we won't tolerate jerks." unless it's in the sports section.
Nunya
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 1:38 p.m.
I won't be judging someone's hit percentage or choice of caliber, nor the execution of their death defying retreat - I will applaud A2.com for following up on this story. I followed it from the beginning - I detest the medias portrayal of firearms - and took issue with A2.com's initial report and its reference as it relates to "victim" and "suspect." Following up, in some way, shows that law abiding citizens can and do employ firearms in their own defense. Here was my initial comment (posted elsewhere on 2 December 2009). "The victim did not live at the home, but the suspect did" Just a second! The terminology here is all wrong. Reading the article - The homeowner/resident shot someone that came to his house. For all we know he was defending himself! The guy that got shot, the 'victim', may have been committing or attempting to commit a...crime when the homeowner/resident shot him in self defense. We need to get the facts first, but the media's portrayal of 'victim' and 'suspect' annoys the crap out of me. A 'suspect' is generally a bad guy. If he was acting in self defense, and we don't know that yet, then he is an armed citizen/hero and the dead guy is the 'suspect' of a crime. I'm withholding judgment pending more facts. I wish the Media should do the same! I intend to watch this one...
dading dont delete me bro
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 1:13 p.m.
if i were sympathetic, why would i bother getting a cpl/ccw? i figure if you're a decent shot, you would not have to empty your clip on some thug. second shirt button down dude. i don't need to make swiss cheese out of somebody.
Davidian
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 12:56 p.m.
UMich Said: "excellent point john. dading, while a cpl holder, obviously slept through his ccw class and/or has no experience with firearms." AGREED. This guy reacted how most humans do when they truly feel their life is in danger. I would bet that Dading have never had to defend himself from a violent criminal with deadly force. If he had, he'd be sympathetic, and more likely, he would have done the same.
John of Saline
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 11:39 a.m.
Rajchel died in the passenger's seat of Farha's vehicle with the pistol tucked in his waistband - its hammer cocked back and ready to fire, police said. Having a cocked gun tucked into your waistband always seemed to me to be, well, not the best method of storage.
John of Saline
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 11:29 a.m.
It sounds like he exited the car as he started firing.
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 11:29 a.m.
In a shoot out it is kill or be killed - at a distance of 3 feet - you better shoot till the threat slumps over - few people miss at 3 feet, even with a slug in them. And while trying to get out of a car, it is even more difficult to shoot straight. I doubt you would have much of a chance to escape the shooter. I also don't think I would be checking to see if each bullet hit the bad guy. In that tense - charged - drunk situation, with a gun being cocked and about to be drawn, I would would have done the same - unloaded the magazine then and there, as my last resort.
dading dont delete me bro
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 11:28 a.m.
i read it that way too, thank you.
Lokalisierung
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 11:26 a.m.
9 is a lot but as stated above this isn't a movie. Your goal isn't to get him to the point of death so he can make some movie quips, it's to save your life. Although it was in a car...wow that's a tight space.
John of Saline
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 11:17 a.m.
Thanks, Amalie. That's how I read it.
Ricebrnr
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 11:13 a.m.
+1 to the 2 previous posts. Not to mention there are 2 ways to stop someone. One is physically disable them. The other psychological, making them want to stop. Those on drugs and intoxicants rarely go "oh I've been shot maybe I should stop now" @annarbor.com. How is it responsible to publish the VICTIM's address current or otherwise?? Do the people who currently reside there need the unwanted attention of oh say the decedent's family or friends? REALLY? Why dodn't you publish other crime victim's addresses while your at it? There was a recent article on juvenile sex assualt. Why don't you start there? USE YOUR HEADS!
cinnabar7071
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 11:10 a.m.
A small caliber weapon such as.25 might take 9 shots to stop the threat, even if it were a.45 why take chances with your life. Glad to see the victim is OK.
Umich2008
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 11:03 a.m.
excellent point john. dading, while a cpl holder, obviously slept through his ccw class and/or has no experience with firearms. it's not like in the movies when someone is thrown across the county with a single gun shot wound. rarely is a dangerous person rendered no longer dangerous after a single or even multiple gun shots. In fact, a wounded person can become even more dangerous as adrenaline and desperation set in. Perhaps dading, if they are truly a supporter of the 2nd ammend and responsible gun ownership, should reconsider making critical comments about something they know absolutely nothing about.
John of Saline
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 10:56 a.m.
I wonder if the guy fired nine times, with all nine hitting the target, or if he fired more than nine times, missing with some shots? He was at really close range, and he was freaking out (having not expected to see the fellow brandish a gun).
dading dont delete me bro
Wed, Mar 31, 2010 : 10:46 a.m.
9 times seems a bit excessive for self defense. and yes, i'm a cpl/ccw holder.