Homeowners catch burglars in the act

Two arrested in Central Avenue burglary
Emil Whitis
Dec 15, 2012


A surprise return by homeowners had a pair of burglars jumping out windows and busting down doors in a failed bid for escape Thursday night on Central Avenue.
Rolland Forney Jr., 34, and a 17-year-old Sandusky boy were charged with aggravated burglary and tampering with evidence.
Forney was also charged with robbery, theft, criminal damaging, assault and criminal damaging, while the teen was also charged with curfew violation.
A man and woman returned to their home in the 1400 block of Central Avenue at about 11:30 p.m. to find the back door wide open, Sandusky police said.  
After the couple walked into the living room, the teen jumped out a second-floor window and onto a roof, while Forney barreled down the stairs toward the front door, police said.  
The man of the house wasn’t about to let Forney go so easily. When the homeowner blocked the door, Forney allegedly punched him several times in the stomach, a police report said.  
Forney then bull-rushed the front door, busting it off its hinges, the report said.
Once outside, the teen and Forney regrouped and headed south on Central Avenue. Police rolled up moments later and found the homeowner lying on the front steps outside.
“(The homeowner) appeared to be injured as he was lying with his head towards the bottom step,” the report said. “There was also a small amount of blood coming from the right side of his mouth.”
Police quickly set up a perimeter and police dog Justice started to track the suspects. Officers spotted the duo sprinting down Central Avenue, arresting both of them near McDonough Street, the report said.  
Forney matched the description provided by the woman, police said.  
Also, a Cannon Power Shot camera hung from his neck. As police scrolled through the camera’s pictures, they saw several photos of the homeowner and his family.  
Other items found on Forney included miscellaneous coins; a cell phone; car keys; a woman's watch; a copper eagle pin; six pocket knives; a Leatherman tool; a red ruby bracelet; and a grooming kit.
“They had some of the folks' belongings on them,” Sandusky police Lt. Robert VanScoy said at the scene. “It’s pretty incriminating.”
Officers placed Forney and the teen in separate police cruisers.
From the back seat of a cruiser, Forney told a Register reporter he never went inside the house and he had no idea what police were talking about.
At about 12:30 a.m. Friday, half a dozen police cruisers were still at the scene.   
Sandusky police assistant Chief John Orzech said officers were quick to respond.
Among the officers involved: Rob Bess; Sean Orman; Robert VanScoy; Eric Graybill; Christopher Denny; Adam West; Brad Wilson; and Cameron Greenwalt.    
“The officers did an outstanding job of setting up a perimeter and quickly and safely apprehending the suspects,” Orzech said. “These guys are the future of the department and they’re real solid officers with good heads on their shoulders.”
The teen was taken to the Erie County Juvenile Detention Center, while late Friday Forney was still in the Erie County jail on $68,110 bond.



Isn't this the same Forney who is wanted in Huron County and who has scammed so many stores in several counties by bad checks.. He has a long history of criminal activity. At 34, he'll never learn .

Too bad he didn't break into an armed marine's house.


yes it is.


Yep! Forney again.


adam west! is he related to batman?

Simple Enough II

Yes, but there is one that goes by the stage name of Mona who appears at the "Crowbar" I hear...Just hear....You know the old line, "How do you seperate the men from the boys in Greece? With a crowbar......". That's all tonight folks , be sure to tip your waitress as she's buying me drinks later!


Great tracking, Justice !! Hope the homeowner's recovering.

Simple Enough II

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights) and Libel and defamation.


I carry every place I go that is LEGAL to do so, and if it's not I take my money else where and if it can't be helped like a hospital or that type of thing then it gets locked up til such time as I am able to put it back on my hip, because I am a RESPONSIBLE gun owner. That being said when I walk into my home no matter what time of the day, my gun is always on me. If I walked into my house and encountered these people, I can promise you that the fella who has already a lengthy criminal background from the sounds of it would no longer have to worry about it any longer nor would he be a burden to anyone ever again, that I promise and make no mistake that goes for any criminal in my home uninvited and I don't care what color their skin is just for the record! If you break in my house and obviously have no problem trying to do harm to me or my family as happened here, I have no problem shooting you and not losing a wink of sleep over it!


I commend you for not only being willing but being ABLE to defend yourself and your loved ones. I would hope you'd also protect strangers if you could, and am betting that that's the case.

I, too, do my best to avoid businesses that post notices on their doors that weapons aren't welcome there. I've thought for some time that I should make up some sort of a form for those business owners to sign. It would say that, since they've taken away my unalienable right to defend myself, THEY will accept that liability. Further, if anything were to happen to me on their watch that might have been mitigated by me if I'd had a firearm, they'll owe me (or, sadly, my estate) a hefty sum. Wonder how many owners/managers would be willing to REALLY accept the responsibility they're trying to forcefully take from me!

Please note: I think private property owners should be able to set whatever rules they want. The rest of us are effectively guests there and should respect whatever those rules might be. That being said, if I decide you're not allowed to defend yourself in my place, and if I further take away any ability you have to do so, it falls on ME to ensure your safety and security! Same should be true of those naive businesses that seem to think a sign on the door will protect them from the bad guys even while making sure that the good guys can't do anything about those who really don't give a dam* about a warm and fuzzy piece of paper!


VERY WELL SAID and you are correct sir that I would do my best to defend any and all persons and not just myself, but there are rules to that as well that MUST be followed. But if you go to the website Ohioans for Concealed Carry of OFCC for short you can print out business cards that say "NO GUNS NO MONEY" and has a picture of money with a slash through it. While I agree that business owners have the right to post whatever rules they choose. But I don't have to give them my money either and I don't. On that same website there is a list of places from bars to places to eat or shop that are CPZ's (Criminal Protection Zones) meaning that unarmed people are easy targets for criminals. Just some food for thought and there are a lot of GOOD groups on Facebook such as the same OFCC and Ohioian's for constitutional carry to name a few that are very informative groups and NOT a bunch of gun toting crazy people. But people who RESPECT the law and are RESPONSIBLE firearm owners.


Thanks for the info, I'm hoping my husband will be helping me get my CCW permit here soon.


Yw anytime but MAKE SURE that you have the REQUIRED 12 hours of training which is 10 hours class room and 2 hours range time. There are a lot of under handed people running the classes half way just to make some $$ and people who get their licenses from them are losing them right away. Also make sure you take it over 2 days instead of one 12 hour day because it's a lot of information to take in and it will wear on you. Just my two cents worth and if you call some gun shops they can probably recommend some places if they don't offer them themselves. I will however say stay away from Bellevue area from taking classes as about all I can say other than save your money and go to better more credible people and not a bunch of hillbilly's.


You're not kidding Steeler. I went to the gun club north of Bellevue with a buddy one time. Just to have a few cheap beers. I watched a drunk wrap his brand new, nickel plated double barrel around a tree. Why? Because he was drunk and it was the guns fault that he couldn't hit any clays.

Nickel plated, hand etched double barrel, 6K. Five to six beers, around $2.50, watchin' the guy wrap that gun around a tree after bragging about it for an hour and shooting one set...priceless.


Thank you. My husband has some guys he works with at both jobs that can help in that. I'm confident in getting great training as he is a police officer part time. I will make sure to take your suggestions seriously. :)


Hell's Bells...I just seen that Forney's photo on the Erie county jail site a couple of weeks ago.

He didn't waste any time , did he?


OK, now let's say Forney would have said something self incriminating to the idiot reporter that felt it necessary to interview him in the cruiser. No rights given, printed in the paper, and then thrown out of court. Great job SPD and Justice. Another poor job by SR reporting.



God bless the man of this house! If these thugs would've gotten away, it could've been my house next! These criminals don't care! They could certainly break into a home with defenseless children and terrorize everyone.

I hope the homeowner wasn't injured too badly and recovers quickly to have a blessed holiday. May they find peace in knowing their quick actions not only protected their property, but made this city that much safer for myself and my small children. Thank you.


i agree. lets hope he gets a gun, a ccw permit, and practice and training if he doesn't already have it. the police are not bodyguards. their job is to enforce the law, not to protect and serve. im not putting down the police, just stating fact..


The ads that are on these pages are annoying. They block part of the stories.
I am glad they caught the thieves and I'm not surprised that the first thing someone has to blog about is guns. Guns, guns, guns. Goody for you, you have a gun. So did that young man's mother who died from her own guns, along with a bunch of innocent little children. Can't you gun lovers give it a rest for awhile? Geez. Maybe I have one, but who needs to know? Only me.


You can block those ads and popups, LadyC.


no, i will not give it a rest. if you dont like it, dont read it. we have rights to our opinions just like you do. there, now wasn't that simple?


How in the hell do you equate a mass shooting with someone referring to home invasion/breakin from a few months ago ...that was in the first comment , right?

What exactly is your definition of a gun "lovers" , just because a person owns a gun doesn't always mean they are an enthusiast, sometimes it's just a matter of protection.

One thing for, sure, this 34 yr old criminal needs a hard lesson. And I agree, if he would have found himself facing a homeowners gun at the very least he would have messed himself.


LadyC if people like you had the first clue of what a TRUE RESPONSIBLE FIREARM owner really was you might actually be surprised! There are more of us than you or the gov't or ESPECIALLY the BIASED media give any of us credit for! While that was a TERRIBLE TERRIBLE tragedy that happened in CT. and should NEVER have happened. That DOES NOT give you or anyone else the right to group us all into that same group as monsters like that guy! Yes his mom died by her own guns and if you have kids and they walk in your house are you really gonna think twice about questioning them every place they walk??? How do any of us know that she didn't buy them for him or that he used them from time to time and so she never thought twice?? None the less I will tell you I am sick to death of fighting with people like you and worrying about if and more like WHEN that idiot in the White House and that leather face Senator from California are gonna put their heads together along with a few more anti second amendment supreme court justices to REVERSE The Heller decision. If you don't know what that is I STRONGLY suggest you Google it. Because it was one of THREE TIMES this year alone that the Supreme Court came within ONE VOTE of saying WE DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT KEEP AND BEAR ARMS! But of course this isn't anything your gonna read in the Sanudksy Register nor will you hear about on your evening news because the news media is BIASED when it comes to firearms! When is the last time you heard about anything such as the United Nations Small Arms Treaty or ATT that would basically strip all of us of our right to own a firearm under the United Nations and Obama is pushing to sign it!! Also because some of us CHOOSE to own firearms for sport and recreation and while they do fall into self protection also it DOES NOT make us "gun lovers" it makes us FREEDOM lovers and exercising our rights granted to us by the Bill Of Rights just like you are doing with your First Amendment are you not?? So does that make so you a first amendment lover??? That being said and I will get off my soapbox but something to consider for people like you is that while you may or may not own firearms (which I am thinking NOT). Remember this that the 2nd amendment is not there to allow people to hunt, but to protect us from tyranny and an oppressive gov't! It's a last resort after the FIRST amendment fails and the gov't becomes too big for the people and they forget they work for us and turn back into what we fought to get away from and they stop listening to WE THE PEOPLE whom the constitution was written for and to PREVENT a repeat of history. So just remember this... once the guns are gone which an "assault weapons" ban would basically take away 99.9% of ALL guns and so what are you left with?? Muskets and single barrel shotguns at best maybe a revolver? People need to really understand what a TRUE "assault rifle" is and it's NOT something that can be purchased online or at any gun store. The TRUE assault rifle was banned way back in the 60's and those guns are FULLY AUTOMATIC meaning that you just hold down the trigger and the gun fires til it runs out of bullets or you let off the trigger. The guns we can but LEGALLY is ONE TRIGGER PULL ONE BULLET and NOTHING MORE even if you hold the trigger down! So once people like you and the BIASED media understand that the better off we will all be!


@ Lady C

First of all , I NEVER said I have a gun. Whether I do or don't is none of your business. Don't assume. I absolutley believe in the right to bear arms. With exceptions !!

And yes, The marine a few months ago, Stoppped the guy breaking in his house. HE has that right to protect his family and property. As do you and as do I. OR about the young mother last New year's protecting her baby in Iowa (not sure what state) when she shot the intruder who had a knife, and was intent on killing her and her baby. It's called Protecting yourself and family.

That has ABSOLUTLEY nothing to do with the INTENTIONAL MASSACARE in Newtown, CT.

Two different issues and for the record I absolutley believe NO ONE but NO ONE except for law enforcement and military has the right to have a assault rifles -- not even the collectors.

We don't need weapons of war out on our streets.

P.S. I do NOT blog .. I comment.

Blogs are WEb logs- this is a public comment section.


My, I touched a few nerves. I never mentioned names, pointed fingers, or claimed to be against gun ownership. I believe I said "Gun Lovers." I have no problem with gun ownership, but in light of the recent tragedy, those who feel the need to go on and on about how great guns are just kind of make me SMH. oh, excuse me ragwhatever- COMMENT and thanks luvblues, I'll try again


You singled me out when you mentioned my first comment, referring guns. Maybe you need to re read your comment. Now, who went on about how great guns were? I did not.

Do you need me to clarify? If this dude would have broken into an armed Marine's house he would have faced the same as did the Murr idiot did when he broke into that Marine's house a few months ago.

Or do you not understand that this homeowner was injured?

It's ragtop , LadyC ... as in 66 convertible or didn't your "genius" brain KNOW that?

Simple Enough II

I do believe that guns used favorably (in defense) are 5-1 vs. criminal acts.


I did not single you out. I made a general statement about guns being brought into the comments right away. If you feel singled out, or defensive about that, I apologize. That wasn't my intent. Like I said before, I am not against gun ownership at all, but feel that it should be private, not glamorized, bragged about, or encouraged. There are just too many times they have fallen into the wrong hands. This latest mass shooting breaks my heart. It doesnt even matter who is to blame, to those families who lost their children. And this story caught my attention because I used to live in that area. I don't claim to be a genius or have all the answers. I'm just sick of the violence that is spreading like a cancer. I do think that neighbors should get to know each other, and stick together, watch out for each other, especially their elderly neighbors. OK, Ragtop66, I did figure it was a car, I was just being sarcastic. I guess I will get off of here now, and Facebook as well. Just had enough gun talk for a good long time. Peace.


Love how they annouced all the officers to give them all praise.. It's their JOBS!!!


Well, their JOB or not~I'm going to thank them................thank you SPD!
Great job~keep catching these creeps no matter what they are doing and throw them in jail and HOPE the courts will do what needs to be done to protect this city AND our LE! Thanx to you to JUSTICE ;)


I hope the home owners are doing alright


Sounds like a pair of Grinches will be spending their Christmas in jail. Wonder what the holiday meal will be ?


Bread and water with a side of 2x 4 upside the head.


oh yeah!

Mama of 4

@CitySlicker if the suspect had said something incriminating to the reporters they would be able to keep it into the courtroom because the officers are not the 1 questioning him it was the reporter.


OK Mama of 4. Ask any defense attorney what he would do come court time with an incriminating statement that was printed for the public to see.


Guns owner salivating over the oppurtunity to shoot a home invader scares me. I am all for having guns in your home for protection, but the post implies a yearning for the oppurtunity to kill someone. I know this will draw the venom of some but in reference to the ccw law. I don't really want to be at the mercy of the sanity of a "legal" ccw permit owner. If you are that afraid to go into Walmart without your gun, you have bigger problems than not carrying your gun and arguably should not carry one.

Statistically gun owners are vicimized by their own weapons more than "shoulder rolling" through a window to save the lives of the innocent as many of them seem to fantasize about. I hope your wish does not come true and noone breaks into your house so you can shoot them. There I have said it, and I wish everyone a Merry Christmas


@Dontcare, there is NOBODY "salivating" over the "opportunity" to shoot a home invader. Also what crack are you smoking with the remark about a "legal" CCW permit?? There is NOTHING that is "illegal" about having a CCW permit and there is TRAINING that goes along with it also! Lol are you that warped and have you drank that much kool-aid from the left wing liberals punch bowl to think that people who have their CCW are "afraid" so that's why they carry a gun and take it with them to Walmart or where ever they go?? It's called PROTECTION and NOT BEING A VICTIM! As for "shoulder rolling through a window to save lives of the innocent as "MANY" of them (keywords here) SEEMS to fantasize about" comment lol I don't know where your getting your information I am guessing Fox news since they tell you "the truth" NOT!! I challenge you to PROVE to everyone about your "FACTS" or rather STATISTICS about more gun owners are "victimized" by their own guns?? PLEASE ENLIGHTEN US with a CREDIBLE website so as to prove your point other than the one sitting on top of your shoulders between your ears on top of your head! I have NEVER heard such IGNORANCE in all my life! 99.9999999% of CCW holders will tell you that they hope to NEVER have to draw their firearm for self defense. Also a little bit of information for you if you were to actually do something useful with your computer other than flap your lips about something you know nothing about! But that being said just a little FYI if you go onto the Ohio Attorney General's website and read the RULES and FACTS about carrying a firearm and having a CCW and the RULES that MUST BE FOLLOWED TO THE LETTER in order to use said firearm for protection a few things MUST BE MET BEFORE YOU CAN USE IT. First and foremost us CCW holders FIRST have the duty to retreat FIRST if we can safely do so as the FIRST choice in a confrontation. So that means for small minded people like yourself that WE CAN'T just pull our guns out and shoot 100's of bullets and ask questions later unlike what you seem to think. Secondly here is the actual information from the OAG's website as it's written BY LAW as to when the use of deadly force is authorized....


Depending on the specific facts of the situation, an accused person may claim that use of deadly force was justfied to excuse his actions, which
would otherwise be a crime. Self-defense or the defense of another is an
affirmative defense that an accused may assert against a criminal charge for
an assault or homicide offense.

The term “affirmative defense” means the accused, not the prosecutor,
must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he acted in self-defense or in defense of another. In other words, the defendant must prove that it is more probable than not that his use of deadly force was necessary due to the circumstances of the situation.

Whether this affirmative defense applies to the situation or whether it will likely succeed against criminal charges depends heavily on the specific
facts and circumstances of each situation. The Ohio Supreme Court has explained that a defendant must prove three conditions to establish that he acted in defense of himself or another.

Condition 1: Defendant Is Not At Fault
First, the defendant must prove that he was not at fault for creating the
situation. The defendant cannot be the first aggressor or initiator.

However, in proving the victim’s fault, a defendant cannot point to otherunrelated situations in which the victim was the aggressor. Remember, the
focus is on the specfic facts of the situation at hand.If you escalate a confrontation by throwing the first punch, attacking, or
drawing your handgun, you are the aggressor. Most likely in this situation,you cannot legitimately claim self-defense nor would you likely succeed in
proving your affirmative defense.

Condition 2: Reasonable and Honest Belief of Danger
Second, the defendant must prove that, at the time, he had a real belief that he was in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm and that his use of deadly force was the only way to escape that danger. Bear in mind that deadly force may only be used to protect against serious bodily harm or death.
The key word is “serious.”

In deciding whether the bodily harm was serious, the judge or jury canconsider how the victim attacked the defendant, any weapon the victimhad, and how he used it against the defendant. Minor bruises or bumps
from a scuffle probably do not meet the legal definition of “serious.” In
court cases, rape has been determined to be serious bodily harm, as has being attacked with scissors. Serious bodily harm also may result from being struck with an object that can cause damage, such as a baseball bat or a wooden club. The defendant’s belief that he is in immediate serious danger is important. The defendant’s belief must be reasonable, not purely speculative. In deciding if the belief was reasonable and honest, the judge or jury will envision themselves standing in the defendant’s shoes and consider his physical characteristics, emotional state, mental status, and knowledge; the victim’s actions and words; and all other facts regarding the encounter. The victim must have acted in a threatening manner. Words alone, regardless of how abusive or provoking, or threats of future
harm (“I’m going to kill you tomorrow”) do not justify the use of deadly

Condition 3: Duty to Retreat
A defendant must show that he did not have a duty to retreat or avoid the danger. A person must retreat or avoid danger by leaving or voicing his intention to leave and ending his participation in the confrontation.

If one person retreats and the other continues to fight, the person who left the confrontation may later be justified in using deadly force when he
can prove all three conditions of self-defense existed. You should always try to retreat from a confrontation before using deadly force if retreating does not endanger yourself or others.If the person can escape danger by means such as leaving or using less than deadly force, he must use those means. If you have no means to escape the other person’s attack and you reasonably, honestly believe that you are about to be killed or receive serious bodily harm, you may be able to use deadly force if that is the only way for you to escape that danger.

So I hope this clears up your VERY JADED concept of a bunch of "cowboys" walking around half cocked waiting around for next gun fight at the "OK CORRAL". But your entitled to your own opinions if you can even call them that since your ideas are backed up by NOTHING and mine are backed up with FACTS. So next time you feel the need to open your mouth about something and THINK your going to have a debate with someone, make sure you come prepared with something other than misconceptions of reality! Oh just in case you don't believe what I wrote about the FACTS here is the website to read for yourself or for anyone else who is interested in FACTS. http://www.scribd.com/doc/658396...

looking around

@Steelerfan 7272 It is obvious to me that you are a "responsible" gun owner and deserve the "privilege" of having a CCW permit, and by the way that is a privilege and is revokable. While you point out the letter of law in use of deadly force I also note many here who claim to be CCW holders or gun advocates stating that had it been their residence things would have been different and the purp would have been dead. That is scary talk I'm sure you would agree. I also hold a CCW permit issued in the state of NY and quite frankly their issuance process is much more stringent, taking up to a year in some cases. The classes are held for about six weeks as I recall, and if the instructor feels you are not competent or perhaps may have mental instability problems, or perhaps over aggressive he refers you to a psychologist for further evaluation. Upon receiving your recommendation you must appear before a judge in chambers, it is his ultimate decision to either grant or decline your request. Not everyone makes it past the judge or for that matter even gets an audience with him. My permit was work related, I had no problem but I can tell you many of the people I encountered during the process scared the bee gezzies out of me and I'm glad they were not granted the privilege and furthermore would hope they would not be able to own any kind of gun. I'm a Democrat and even as a gun owner understand the need for restrictive laws pertaining to gun ownership. What I don't like is how many gun advocates seem to want to group democrats or liberals as you like to call us into a group you claim would trample your rights. I also don't care for you calling the President of the United States an idiot. I've seen Presidents come and go, Republican and Democrat but have never been so disrespectful to refer to them as idiots! At this time the current administration has taken no action other than to acknowledge a need to look into the details of current events surrounding the debate. I would expect any President would be so concerned and would do the same thing. The police did a good job of apprehending these criminals with out firing a shot or putting any citizens in danger. The homeowner was lucky he could have put both him and his companion in grave danger when he tried to block these guys escape route. Had they been armed or not and the homeowner armed as well they were in retreat and so the homeowner may not have been found as justified to use his weapon as spelled out in your post of governing law.


The facts you sent everyone to in an effort to justify your response was to the self defense laws. They are not in dispute. The article I quoted above is an academic study, there are many others that substaniate what I am saying. Your post was a whole lot of nothing, rambling on about self defense when that issue is not in question. I suggest you turn off Glenn Beck and read some journals that actually do exist, you can read them with your gas mask on and in your fortified bunker if you want.


Hahaha! "Forney told a Register reporter he never went inside the house and he had no idea what police were talking about." I suppose the camera with the family photos on it just jumped on his neck from the street? Lock him up, the little liar.