Robert John Summers, 28

Sept. 7, 2010, 9:17 a.m.

Robert Summers, a 28-year-old white man, was killed while allegedly committing a robbery Wednesday, Sept. 1, in the 200 block of East Avenue K-8 in Lancaster, according to authorities.

According to Los Angeles County sheriff's officials, Summers and another man were apparently trying to burglarize a Lancaster business about 3:30 a.m. when the business owner confronted them with a handgun and fired.

According to coroner's records, Summers was shot in the head.

He was taken to a hospital where he died the same afternoon, sheriff's officials said. Investigators said it is possible that the other person with Summers also was shot and wounded. The man fled the scene and has not been located.

Anyone with information about the incident is asked to contact the sheriff's homicide bureau at (323) 890-5500.

-- Robert J. Lopez

Share a memory or thought about Robert John Summers

Before you post, here are some answers to frequently asked questions:

Remember, all posts are approved by a Times staffer. Profanity and personal attacks will not be approved.

35 reader comments

I strongly feel if someone who breaks into my home or business with the intent to commit a felony, I should have the right to use force, even terminal force, against them.

I don't understand why I shouldn't be able to use force against robber/felon just because they are unarmed. Do not they assume the natural consequences of their actions?

I'm a woman, if someone breaks into my home I'm not going to stick around and ask if they are planning on taking something or raping me. I'm going to attack them. I don't own a gun, but I wish I did. I would kill someone before I ever let them take a chance.

My home is my castle. You don't have the right to come in uninvited. You don't have the right to steal from a business and then complain because the owner didn't just roll over and let you get away.

Plus this is absolutely not the first time this man has committed robbery and probably other crimes. This is just the first time he got caught.

Again, criminals must assume the natural consequences of their actions. It's like they think, "I'm the criminal, only I get to use force and commit crimes. You're the victim so sit quietly while I steal your livlihood, rape you, or murder you." I. Don't. Think. So.

— Ere I Saw Elba Nov. 12, 2010 at 6:16 p.m.

Annette,
Really? So I should just leave my home unlocked just in case someone comes around who needs something I've worked very hard for a little more than I? So in other words in your eyes it is perfectly okay to take things because you can? And by any means necessary? We make choices every single day for our lives. I don't care what kind of situation this person thought he was in or what kind of bad day he thought he was having he made a choice and he paid for it. What angers 99% of the people on this open blog is not that the dead was loved but the fact that SOME have teh nerve to come on this blog and write things like: he was a great (fill in the blank). None of us can have life both ways...to break laws that the majority have deemed lawful and then take those ill gotten monies and support a family. Does it matter how the ill gotten items were obtained? The reason the dead on this blog have been able to be good son's or father's or brother's or etc. is due to the fact they didn't have to work at being good father's or son's or anything for that matter. The family members of this people were content to enjoy the ill gotten goods that these people brought home. And in the end isn't that the bottom line? You were happy to take the illegal money or items so long as your man was at your side.

— Penny Nov. 10, 2010 at 11:52 p.m.

Angelica,

I don't care if all that is been "taken" from me is a stick of bubble gum. I work hard for even that one little stick of bubble gum and no one has the right to just walke right up and take it. I would pull the trigger on that gun and then take my chances with the jury! All I would need would be one person on that jury to understand how hard I work for MY things not Summers stuff to let me walk free. In conclusion:we all have the right to do what ever the heck we want to do...we just have to be willing to deal with the consiquences of those actions. And if taking the gun, then taking a deep breath and then pulling the trigger takes care of my problem. Whose to say I was wrong? Oh well I guess that just goes back to that one juror.

— Penny Sept. 21, 2010 at 11:32 p.m.

Well after reading this.. everyone is entitled to their own opinions but this I must say!!!! ROBERT SUMMERS WAS MY FIANCE... MY LOVE.. NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO JUDGE HIM OR ANYONE ELSE!!!! Do I agree with what he did... HELL NO.... but this I must say and let be known to get 2 bullets to the back of the head is not RIGHT!! Not even cops shoot people in the back of the damn head.. shoot their leg.. something else.. and yes I have thought about WHAT IF it was my family that got robbed.. they too do not have the right!!! And BEFORE YOU WANT TO JUDGE.. let me tell u Robert was a GREAT SON, FATHER, LOVER & FRIEND! HE has a GREAT HEART! As for the event that took place NO ONE knows what he was going through in life.. who he has lost.. what he has done.. he was not a "THUG nor GANG MEMBER" So please REMEMBER..... you are NOT GOD.. DO NOT JUDGE! ~Robert I love you and miss you soooooo much.. I want 2 slap you but hug you also... tomorrow is my b-day and it is going to be a bad day!!
Kim, Angel and Annette.. THANK YOU GUYS for the support and love for him!! WE KNOW HIM>> WE KNOW
WHAT KIND OF PERSON HE WAS... THESE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO JUDGE BASED ON AN ARTICLE CAN.. WELL YOU KNOW..IT WAS HIS TIME.. HE IS WITH HIS FATHER AND AWAY FROM THIS HELL ON EARTH!!!

— ANGELICA Sept. 20, 2010 at 8:56 p.m.

Ok syscom3 once again I'm not condoning what Mr. Summers was doing was right. What I'm saying is what gives the owner or anyone the right to shoot someone in the back??? When he was fleeing the scene. And I will say it once again What MR. SUMMERS WAS DOING WAS WRONG AND HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUNISHED FOR HIS CRIME NOT EXECUTED BY SOMEONE WHO TOOK IT UPON THEMSELVES TO BE JUDGE, JURY AND EXECUTIONER. I believe in the second amendment completely and had he broke into my home and my family was in danger then yeah I'm going to shoot S.O.B. but not execute him. That is not for me to decide.

Citizanjohn
I know that there is not a lot of information on this page, which is why it was brought up about making judgment on someone when the facts are not all there. Yes what Robert did was wrong and what I said above is how I feel and we could round and round on this subject, but it will not get us anywhere. I agree with you that what he was doing was indeed WRONG but not to be executed for it. That is all I'm trying to say.

— Angel Sept. 19, 2010 at 6:14 p.m.

I'm not sure where you are getting your information about him being shot in the back of the head twice as he was running from the scene. That information is not contained in this brief report. Nor is there any mention one way or the other about the perps having any weapons on them. It states that one of them actually did get away and perhaps he had a weapon? I will grant you this: if these guys were unarmed and assuming they were outside the building attempting to flee and if our business owner shot them anyway to 'punish' them for their attempted burglary, then he should and probably will be charged. The law is very clear that you cannot shoot someone unless you have reasonable expectation that your life or someone else's life is in immediate danger. If they are inside your home or business, though, uninvited, the courts have determined that a reasonable person would assume they are in immediate danger irrespective of whether the perps have a weapon and you may legally fire upon them. We just don't have enough facts to ascertain what happened here but what we do know is that Robert Summers, a grown man who ought to know better, was up to no good and it cost him his life.

— Citizenjohn Sept. 17, 2010 at 10:52 a.m.

Number 1: Why should anybody care what was going on in his life? He was out sneaking around at 3:30 in the morning breaking into this man's business with intent to steal property and his own stupid behavior caused his demise. Number 2: You won't generally find a 'good man' out burglarizing businesses at 3:30 in the morning. He was obviously a bad man up to no good. Number 3: the business owner was the VICTIM of this attempted burglary and not the criminal. The criminal(s) is the one who got killed by his own foolishness and society is better off with him gone. The honest people in this society have had enough of creeps like Robert Summers (expired) running around doing their evil in the wee hours of the morning. Let this be a WARNING to the rest of you thugs: proceed at your own risk; we're watching for ya and we're armed now.

— Citizenjohn Sept. 10, 2010 at 2:49 p.m.

You don't know him and shame on you for putting him down. You have no idea what he was going through in his life or even the circumstances. He was someone's father, son, boyfriend, friend, etc... He was a good man at a bad time in his life. What you really should be concerned with is the fact that this store owner feels like he has the power to be judge, jury and executioner. It's not the first time he has taken someones life protecting his material items that can be replaced. He could have shot him in the leg or in a non fatal part of his body to stop him, but he shot to kill. That makes him worse than the suspect because he is now a murderer. He is a crminal who happens to own a buisness. He was not in danger if the suspect was running from the scene! Therefore he had no cause to shoot to kill.!!!! I really hope he is prosecuted and/or the family of the "suspect" sues him for everything that is so dam important to him. And he is left with nothing like the little girl who is now left without her daddy.

— Annette Sept. 10, 2010 at 1:23 a.m.