![\"\"\/](\"https:\/\/cdn.christianpost.com\/assets\/img\/icon\/chat-rect.svg\")
<\/a>![\"\"\/](\"https:\/\/cdn.christianpost.com\/assets\/img\/icon\/share-outline.svg\")
<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/header>\n![](\"https:\/\/cdn.christianpost.com\/images\/cache\/image\/14\/86\/148684_w_760_481.webp\")
<\/source><\/picture>Andrew D. Lester, an 84-year-old homeowner who shot Ralph Yarl, a black teenager twice after he mistakenly rang his doorbell in Kansas City, Missouri, in April<\/a> is now headed to a trial after he pleaded not guilty to charges of assault in the first degree and armed criminal action, saying that he, too, made a mistake.<\/p>\n At a preliminary hearing on Thursday after listening to testimony including from both Yarl, now 17, and Lester\u2019s lawyer, Steven Salmon, Clay County Judge Louis Angles ruled there is sufficient evidence in the case for it to go to trial.<\/p>\n Salmon, whose client is claiming self-defense in the shooting, called it a tragic case created through a \u201cmutual mistake\u201d The New York Times reported<\/a>. Lester, he argued, shot Yarl because he felt reasonably threatened after finding him on his porch late at night.<\/p>\n \u201cA terrible event occurred,\u201d Salmon said. \u201cIt\u2019s not a criminal event, however.\u201d<\/p>\n If he is found guilty, Lest could go to prison for life as assault in the first degree<\/a>, a class-A felony. Armed criminal action carries a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison.<\/p>\n Even though Lester is claiming self-defense, Clay County Prosecutor Zachary Thompson, who previously claimed \u201cthere was a racial component to the case,\u201d said the argument for self-defense cannot be applied to the case, because \u201cYou do not have the right to shoot an unarmed kid through a door two times.\u201d<\/p>\n A probable cause statement cited by Yarl, who had mistakenly rang Lester\u2019s doorbell<\/a>\u00a0thinking he was at the correct house to pick up his twin younger brothers just before 10 p.m. on April 13, was shot by Lester in the forehead and right forearm.<\/p>\n Yarl told the court that the night of the shooting he had pulled into a driveway, pressed the bell, and waited, the NY Times said. When he saw what he now knows to be Lester\u2019s wooden interior door finally started to open, he placed his hand on the glass storm door but backed away as soon as he saw a stranger, he now knows to be Lester, with a gun.<\/p>\n \u201cHe holds it up and says, \u2018Don\u2019t ever come here again,\u2019\u201d Yarl said.<\/p>\n Salmon sought to discredit Yarl\u2019s testimony by pointing out that he told police in his initial account of what happened that he hadn\u2019t opened Lester\u2019s glass storm door even though he later admitted to doing so.<\/p>\n Lester\u2019s attorney argued that it was reasonable for him to be afraid because he is an infirm man who lives alone, KCUR reported<\/a>.<\/p>\n Salmon said when his client was roused out of bed, he thought someone was trying to enter his home and Yarl agreed that it is a reasonable position for Lester to hold.<\/p>\n \u201cHe had a split second to make a decision,\u201d Salmon said. \u201cMr. Lester didn\u2019t need to wait to be attacked by a stranger in the dark.\u201d<\/p>\n Salmon said under those circumstances, Lester is allowed to defend himself under Missouri law which includes the castle doctrine.<\/a><\/p>\n Both Salmon and prosecutors agree that Yarl, who mistook Northeast 115th Street for the friend\u2019s house at the nearby Northeast 115th Terrace, meant no harm when he mistakenly rang Lester\u2019s doorbell.<\/p>\n Thompson further argued that while state law allows people to have guns and defend themselves, \u201cyou do not have the right to shoot an unarmed kid two times,\u201d according to KCUR.<\/p>\n \u201cRalph was unarmed. Ralph was unmasked. He wasn\u2019t yanking violently on the door,\u201d Thompson said.<\/p>\n On a recording of the 911 call Lester made on the night of April 13, he reported that a 6-foot-tall black man rang his \u201cdamn doorbell\u201d and that \u201che wanted in my house, but I shot him.\u201d<\/p>\n Despite previously stating that there was a racial component to the case, Thompson said race would not be a legal factor in the case.<\/p>\n “There\u2019s no legal racial component to the offense of assault in the first degree or armed criminal action,\u201d Thompson said. \u201cMy focus remains on what is required by the law.\u201d<\/p>\n Contact: leonardo.blair@christianpost.com<\/a> Follow Leonardo Blair on Twitter: @leoblair<\/a> Follow Leonardo Blair on Facebook: LeoBlairChristianPost<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Join thousands of others to get the FREEDOM POST<\/strong> newsletter for free, sent twice a week from The Christian Post.<\/p>\n<\/div>\nFree<\/span> Religious Freedom Updates<\/h2>\n