Canadian Man Charged With Murder For Killing Home Invader

By John Crump

Unknow Masked Robber
Canadian Man Charged With Murder For Killing Home Invader

Weyburn, Saskatchewan Canada-( January fourth in Weyburn, Saskatchewan Canada a 23-year-old man was charged with second-degree murder for shooting and killing a home invader.

Keegan Muxlow was at home when three masked men broke into his house. The home invaders were armed with a shotgun and a knife. Muxlow in fear for his life retrieved his .22LR caliber rifle and fired several shots at the mask men.

The three men fled the house and Muxlow called the police around 9 PM to report the break-in and the shooting. He told the police that three men with weapons broke into his home and he was forced to shoot at the suspects with his rifle.

About 15 minutes later the police received a call from Weyburn General Hospital stating that they had two patients suffering from various stab wounds and a gunshot wound. The police discovered that the patients were two of the suspects in the home invasion.

Police found 23-year-old Dominick Hawkes in stable condition. He was suffering from stab wounds. Eight-teen-year-old Nathan Hutt was found suffering from a life-threatening gunshot wound. Around midnight Hutt would pass away from his injury.

The next morning Twenty-five-year-old William N. McLeod would turn himself into police for his involvement in the home invasion. He was not injured.

Police would charge Hawkes and McLeod with breaking and entering, committing assault, wearing a disguise during the commission of an offense, possession of a weapon for the purpose of committing an offense, and possession of a firearm without a valid license.

Police also charged Hawkes with possession of cocaine.

The police said that Muxlow was the only one to fire shots in the failed home invasion.

Police then would charge Muxlow with second-degree murder.

This standard procedure for police to lay these charges in a case like this. Although according to Deputy Chief Rod Stafford with the Weyburn Police Service the police do not determine self-defense. That finding is determined by the courts and not the police.

“Police departments have a lot of discretion in laying charges, but in capital cases, I don't think that a police department would ever make a decision on its own not to lay a charge in a capital case where self-defense was either alleged or seemed like maybe even it was a case of self-defense,” said Stafford. “Perhaps a Crown Prosecutor, once they get the file and read it, will direct that charges be amended, or dropped, or added but, again, in a capital case, that decision is best left for a jury to decide once they hear all of the evidence.”

In addition to the second-degree murder charges Police charged Muxlow with unsafe storage of a firearm, use of a firearm during the commission of an offense, and possession of a firearm without a license.

According to the police, the suspects and Muxlow knew each other. When asked if this incident could be drug related a police representative said that it could be, but the police have not determined the motives in the case.

Muxlow is due to make his third court appearance in court last week.

About John CrumpJohn Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%'ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on leftist deplatforming methods and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, on Facebook at realjohncrump, or at

  • 53 thoughts on “Canadian Man Charged With Murder For Killing Home Invader

    1. As far as I’m concerned charge him with possession of a firearm without a valid license and related charges. Otherwise the message they’re sending is AS A CANADIAN IF 3 ARMED MEN BREAK INTO YOUR HOME YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DIE.
      I’m more interested in finding out the source of their illegally obtained weapons and crack down on that or the cycle of violence will never end. Punishing responsible gun owners is not the answer. Find gun dealers, smugglers at the border & those who have guns illegally.

      1. Government is the problem. they’ve disarmed the law abiding and fostered an environment of violent criminals. Now it’s time to persecute the witnesses and make sure the story never gets out.

    2. The legal system in Canada doesn’t necessarily allow one to defend themselves against a lethal threat. But they do allow a man to molest numerous children over a period of years and sentence him to a year in jail. I know this for a fact since I know one of the victims, who is my wife’s nephew and was molested at about 5 years old. The perp’s wife still operates a child care facility and he probably is finding new victims the same way he found the previous ones. They have a distorted and strange system of “justice” there.

    3. Well this is a draw! Neither parties have a licence, So theay both possesed illegal firearms. Lets see the liberal spin on this.
      Some how legal registered gun owners will be blamed.

      1. But don’t forget that he possessed a firearm during the commission of THEIR offense, so HE’S guilty of a crime. Get it ? Pure “logic,” right? He would be the most serious offender in the U.K., btw, which is pretty much what Canada is trying to aspire to.

    4. The police should not be bringing any charges. Police make arrests. Prosecutors offices bring charges or better yet in a case like this an indictment from a grand jury should be sought. Police should just be giving the facts to the prosecutor in a situation like this. If the police feel it is necessary to make an arrest the other two criminals should be arrested for 1st degree murder.

    5. This is Canada!, Canadian people do not have right to protect their lives. What did he expected. Ha-Ha.
      In normal country he would be awarded tor killing criminal and create less job for police,

      1. Hey Bob is what you’re saying really true? everyone should be able to protect their lives, if I was youall in Canada I would try to do something about that law.

        1. Canada’s government thinks that crime victims just need to roll over and submit to the criminals, even if it might cost them their life. They have no right to defend themselves. They have few rights. No right to free speech. It’s a totalitarian state where the government decides what freedoms are allowed for their citizens. The no longer “Great” Britain has gone even farther down this road to fascism.

    6. Did I read this correctly?

      The homeowner was charged with second-degree murder because it is standard practice for police to do so; then a prosecutor, court, or jury decides whether the shooting was justified; the police don’t have the power to decide that.

      Is this correct?

      If so, we need to look homewards, folks. This is precisely what the Commonwealth of Massachusetts does, and has always done in living memory. It treats self-defense as an “affirmative defense” to murder (meaning you have to plead guilty to murder, then prove that you were justified and should not be punished). It’s a strange mismash of guilty until proven innocent, and self-incrimination. Even gun-friendly Arizona had that unfortunate misprision of justice as their state law until about ten years ago. Let’s not rag on Canada too hard.

    7. Will Flatt: Just check the number of States that have the listing as a Commonwealth State, and see which ones have the toughest Gun Laws?????????? It makes you wonder how far they have come to turn against everything the colonists fought against in the Revolution?????? Shows just how weak they really have become!!!!!!!! Patsies, and a Large Herd of Sheep, Just go with the Flow!!!!

      1. Sheep, just like the herd that is shepherded bu those who distract you with false fears of a “them”. How’s your health insurance? How’s your education? How’s your pay? How’s your REAL freedom?

    8. This would be so simple if we the people knew how to sell or if needed, FORCE all the socialist politicians including small town govt to move up to Kannaduh where they already have no 2A rights nor freedom of speech to name a few. Now the commie minded dipocrats wouldn’t have to spend tens of millions of dollars dumbing down the kids in school and colleges here in the US. Everyone gets what they want at great savings and a lot less blood will be shed. The money saved can easily build a wall on our north border too. (And buy canokian bacon!!) what could be better than that?

    9. Muxlow doesn’t appear to be a fligh risk. He should be released while an investigation is conducted.
      The two surviving home invaders can probably be charged with felony murder.

      But as said, Canada is a different country with laws patterned after the U.K. so obviously he should have waited for the invaders to shoot first. ( humor off now )

    10. if he shot them why were there stab wounds
      unlicensed firearm
      possible drug connection
      I agree with the police, this definitely needs more investigation
      something is not right with the story

      1. Why stab wounds? Most likely because the guy with the knife was freaking over the first guy getting shot and was trying to climb over/get past the third guy. 🙂

    11. It appears the Canadians have no Constitution or one that is not written by the people, for the people. That seems like a very good place for our progressives to settle. They can make laws as they go and bow to the socialist leader that is already in place. The people that live there are pure sheeple and let the government do what ever they want to do. We better be careful because we are headed that way in a hurry. Time to stop the run away train and get back to basic laws rather than feel good laws. A person is not allowed to defend themselves when three guys break in, where in the hell could that be legal. In Canook country.

      1. Not all of us are sheep here but your right, a lot of canadians are having trouble pulling their heads out of their asses as Americans and other people from other countries. Some laws here are mind boggling and don’t make sense but that is because most politicians here are stupid with their no common sense thinking. We are waking up but not fast enough.

      1. In the US, if someone is killed during the commission of a felony, the criminals are all charged with that death whether accidental, caused by the good guys or the bad guys. The bad guys are charged with that death because if they had not been there committing a crime the death would not have occurred. The US, God bless ’em also have a right to self defense that goes all the way back to Biblical times.

      2. The Canadians still put the Queen of England on their money. The word “freedom” has been removed from their dictionaries by order of the government.

    12. Too many freeze-thaw cycles have softened the blue-noser’s brains over the years. This is also called CYA on the part of law enforcement. Thank God for the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights!

      1. You mean we still have those? I thought they were purely advisory. At least the Dims believe they are.

        Boris Badenov
        Kommieforniastan, reminding me of the beloved Soviet Union

    13. The problem with socialism is, you can vote your way into it, but you have to shoot your way out of it.

      1. Defending myself is my UNALIENABLE RIGHT regardless of what some Fairy Ballerina( and son of Castro) cum communist P.M. was installed into office. “I’d rather be tried by 12, than buried by 6” never mean’t more. Allowing the RCMP(un-elected bureaucrats with guns) to write and enact laws when ever they choose without a vote by the people, is standard socialist policy. In effect, George ‘Soreholes’ and his puppets runs Canada. I’m so glad I live in the USA led by Trump!

    14. I noticed it was reported that Hawkes was suffering from stab wounds, but that Muxlow only fired at them with his rifle. So I was wondering how and by whom did Hawkes get stabbed.

      1. Likely Hawkes was the guy who told the others that this would be an easy-peasy job and that the victim wouldn’t put up a fight. One of them may have been really close to Hutt, who died as a result of that advice.

    15. Well, it sounds, as if, the authorities are looking at this correctly. Let a jury sort it out. This guy knows those guys. He potentially could’ve been involved in a drug deal gone bad. Maybe, these folks were invited to the home for some reason. Stab wounds on several “victims” and a gunshot wound on one. No way to truly call it.

      1. If you are invited to someone’s home, you don’t typically wear a mask and have a knife/shotgun at the ready. The victim (homeowner) may have known the guys and may have done bad stuff with them in the past. That doesn’t excuse them for B&E with intent to injure or cause grave bodily harm.

        1. Further, potential prior criminal activity does not make it acceptable to apply murder law to a case of self defense. Either the authorities can build a case for criminal activity or they cannot. Punishing a likely criminal for a non-criminal offense is not only a misapplication of justice but one that will bite law abiding citizens who commit the same justified self defense once the precedent is set.

          1. This is in Canada. Different laws.
            They use a different system than we here in the US do when determining just who determines what charges are made.
            It looks like all concerned (including the victim) disregarded the gun laws in effect.

          2. @Proctor, Prior is the opposite of potential. The former is a state of being completed. The latter being a thing not done yet. If you mean that prior bad acts can not be used to prove current allegations, then you are correct, in American courts. In Canada, who knows?

            1. Quote: “According to the police, the suspects and Muxlow knew each other. When asked if this incident could be drug related a police representative said that it could be, but the police have not determined the motives in the case.” So Proctor was correct is saying “potential prior” in that since the ones who broke in and the one who defended himself knew each other there is the potential that they had committed prior criminal activity together.

      2. Rodceasar, in the USA, criminals still have the right to self-defense. Self-defense isn’t valid during the commission of a crime, but being a criminal isn’t enough to remove that right.

        There have even been cases where a felon barred from possession of a firearm have used a firearm in self-defense and were not convicted of any crime. The reason being that when one has a valid use of force, the tool, if any, used is not relevant to the act of self-defense. Meaning courts have ruled that anyone may use anything available at that time for their defense of self because self-defense is a “natural right”.

        Due to possible criminal acts surrounding this event, it is reasonable that he is charged. That would most likely even happen in the USA. I assume the knife injury sustained was from the other survivor in retaliation to his cohort’s poor planning that resulted in his injury and the death of the other.

    16. Yeah Canada has turned in to England /even a butter knive is against the law-Yeah bring in some more Muzzies

    17. Stupid socialist canucks. You have NO rights in Canada, except what the government allows.
      Back in about 1986, the socialist canucks decided no Canadian needed a firearm. So they limited then banned various guns. Then they decided you cannot use a firearm to save your life.
      Might kill a socialist liberal voter.

      So in the United States, the anti-American communist democrats keep trying to disarm Americans. They demand the communist America Hillary & Bernie promised. They want Americans slaves to their communist government.
      You WILL have to fight these communists. You WILL have to stop these anti-American scum.
      Or, you can continue to allow the anti-American communist democrats to keep pushing our country toward communism because you are too cowardly to do your Constitutional Duty and too busy taking selfies, texting and worrying about basketball. The Founding Fathers must be weeping because Americans are such yellow cowards.

      1. Americans think they know their northern neighbors but Canadistan is a lot more socialist than you’re aware. This gun ban / registry is one of the reasons I left that country. I am now a proud American citizen (II did it legal). Sure, we have our faults but we are by far the best country in the world for freedom & justice. I know because I have lived in 4 different countries for more than 3 years. If we don’t stop these anti-American communist liberals in this country we will find ourselves in a second civil war and no-one wants that. Ay this point I need only say one thing “From my cold dead fingers”

      2. Craig, the colonists bent over for the Brits, too, and didn’t want to leave the empire. Even after the powder and arms were seized in Boston, it still took the killing of more colonists and a further attempt at seizing powder and arms before the colonists had enough. The documents and letters, etc., show rebellion was a very serious matter – a last resort, not done at “the drop of a hat”. We are not there yet, we don’t want it, and neither did the colonists.

        Even then, rebellion still was not popular, and only an estimated 3% fought the Brits. No one expected to beat the greatest military power of the day. The Brits lost because they were fighting two wars, and if not for the aid of the French, who the Brits were also fighting, we likely would have lost. Recall the circumstances that ended the revolution. The French blockaded the port at Yorktown preventing the escape of the besieged Brits that led to their surrender, ending the war.

        1. Heed the Call-up didn’t cite a source for the notion that “only an estimated 3% fought the Brits,” and I don’t buy it at all. At the level of my 4th great grandfathers (roughly the generation that could have fought in the War) I have identified 18 who were living in United Colonies during the War, spread from North Carolina to Massachusetts. Of those, three were Quakers or German Baptists who felt bound by conscience not to fight, though two supported the Revolutionary Army with food and other supplies (and the Quakter was reprimanded by the Meeting for doing so). Ten bore arms on the side of the Patriots. Of the rest, one had only come to America a few years before from Germany and probably felt bound by the Oath of Allegiance to the King that he had been required to swear out upon disembarking at Philadelphia, but in any event he did not fight with the British. Another was only five years old when the fighting stopped. The others were older (45 to 60) and had large families to support (in one case 17 children), so did not participate in the War, at least insofar as the extant records reveal, other than to supply provisions to the troops, but in only one case is there any evidence of Tory sympathy. In addition to the 4th great grandfathers, I had one 5th great grandfather who served in the North Carolina Militia at age 61 and was captured by the British and consigned to a prison ship, which broke his health and he died soon after the end of the war. Balancing him out is a 3rd great grandfather who, while teenager, appears to have provided some sort of assistance to the Loyalist cause while his brother fought with the rebels. So basically of those who theoretically could have served, that’s 58% who took up arms on behalf of the Revolution, 21% conscientious objectors but who supported the Colonists as opposed to the Brits, 10% Tory sympathizers and the rest neutral or their attitude unknown. Even if you reduce that 58% figure by adding in the women and children, it’s still far greater than the cited three percent.

          1. Nathan, your family history is not indicative of all persons living in America at that time. The III%ers take their name from the belief that only about 3% of Americans fought in the Revolutionary War, that is why I stated that “fact”. Here are some quick facts, since you apparently are too incompetent to do your own research:

            I will help you with your limited abilities further. One link shows 80,000 US service members, the other shows 3,929,214 people in the US in 1790. I couldn’t readily find 1776-1783, but we can assume there would have been about the same number or fewer in America at the time of the war. What that shows is fewer than 3% were service members. If you wish to debate, bring facts, as you requested of me. Otherwise you are just another ignorant troll.

    18. That’s what you get when you live in a “Commonwealth nation” where the fundamental right to self-defense is denied. As went England, so goes many if not all of the nations that were once part of the British Empire.

      This is why we have a 2nd Amendment to enshrine our God-given absolute Right to defend ourselves against common criminals and if need be the government itself. I pity the fools that allow their rights to be taken away without so much as a whimper.

      1. We’d damn well better rally to defend OUR 2nd as the democRAT/socialist/communist party plans to take them away. We can’t trust Chump either as he publicly stated, …”take the guns and worry about due process later ….” (paraphrasing). The 2nd was originally meant to prevent a tyrannical government from gaining a foothold and yet, here we are watching states passing Red Flag and other laws that are unconstitutional and against the 2nd. We cannot trust the Senate GOP either as they have been bought and paid for. It is up to people to prevent corrupt politicians as they protect their own and yet again, voting hasn’t done so. Dead and illegal voters handing seats in both, Houses and state governorships to dems.
        Believing “the-other-guys” and not us, will prevent the continued destruction of this country is how we’ve gotten into this mess. Time for a radical change in our thinking. Wake up people.

        1. AND the likely new atty.general is a gun grabber as well. I don’t know what the hell Trump was thinking when he nominated this guy.

    Comments are closed.