A Boone County homeowner faces voluntary manslaughter charges after shooting and killing a house cleaner who arrived at the wrong address early one morning. The case in Whitestown, Indiana, on November 5, 2025, has sparked intense debate over the states self-defense laws and how far they extend in everyday mix-ups.

Curt Andersen, 62, fired through his front door at Maria Florinda Ríos Pérez de Velázquez, 32, without warning or checking who was there. Prosecutors say his actions went beyond reasonable self-defense, even under Indianas stand-your-ground rules passed in 2006.

The Tragic Incident Unfolds

The shooting happened around 7 a.m. in the quiet Heritage subdivision on Maize Lane. Maria, a Guatemalan immigrant and mother of four, worked as part of a cleaning crew with her husband. They drove to what they thought was their clients home but ended up at Andersens place by mistake.

Andersen had stayed up late, going to bed around 2 or 3 a.m. He and his wife heard noises at the door and felt alarmed. Grabbing his handgun, Andersen approached the front entrance. Without opening the door or calling out, he fired a single shot. The bullet struck Maria in the head, and she collapsed on the porch.

Her husband held her as she died, crying out in grief. Andersens wife then dialed 911, telling dispatchers that people were trying to break in. Police arrived quickly but had to coax Andersen out of the house after he refused to exit from the front.

Charges Filed and Defense Response

On November 17, 2025, Boone County Prosecutor Kent Eastwood announced the voluntary manslaughter charge against Andersen. This Level 2 felony carries a potential sentence of 10 to 30 years in prison. Eastwood stressed that while the office supports self-defense rights, the facts here did not justify deadly force.

Andersen told investigators he believed intruders were forcing entry. He described the event as an incident and reenacted it for police later that day. A search of his home turned up the gun and a spent cartridge casing.

His attorney, Guy Relford, a well-known Second Amendment advocate, called the charges disappointing. Relford plans to argue in court that Andersens actions fit under the castle doctrine part of Indianas self-defense law. He believes the homeowner had every reason to fear for his safety at that moment.

To clarify the timeline of events, here is a simple breakdown:

Victim’s Life and Family’s Grief

Maria Florinda Ríos Pérez de Velázquez left behind a loving family in Indianapolis. As a dedicated mother, she supported her four children and husband through her cleaning job. Friends and relatives remember her as kind and hardworking, always putting her family first.

The community has rallied around the family with a GoFundMe campaign that raised thousands quickly. It covers funeral costs and helps with daily needs now that Maria is gone. Her death has hit hard, especially since it stemmed from such a simple error in navigation.

One relative shared that Maria had no criminal record and was just starting her day. The loss feels senseless to many who knew her. It raises tough questions about safety for immigrant workers in unfamiliar neighborhoods.

Expert Views on Indiana Self-Defense Laws

Legal experts point out that Indianas stand-your-ground law allows people to use force, including deadly force, if they reasonably believe its needed to stop serious harm or a felony. Passed in 2006, it removes any duty to retreat inside your home, building on the older castle doctrine idea.

But reasonableness is key. Indiana University law expert Zachary Cormier explains that even if someone trespasses, there must be a clear and present threat. Just knocking or approaching the door might not qualify. In this case, the probable cause affidavit suggests Andersen acted too quickly without verifying the danger.

Other analysts note that courts look at what the person knew at the time. Did Andersen have enough info to think his life was in immediate peril? Prosecutors argue no, given the early hour and lack of forced entry attempts.

Here are some core elements of Indianas self-defense statute:

• Reasonable belief of imminent harm.
• No duty to retreat in your dwelling.
• Force must match the perceived threat.
• Applies to protecting property in limited ways.

This framework has protected many in real break-ins but faces scrutiny in mistaken identity cases like this one.

Public Outrage and Broader Implications

Reactions poured in fast across social media and forums. Many called the shooting tragic and avoidable, questioning why Andersen did not look through a peephole or ask who was there. Others defended homeowners rights, citing rising concerns over property crimes.

Discussions on platforms like Reddit and X highlighted fears in suburban areas. Some users shared stories of early morning disturbances, while others worried about overzealous gun use. National news coverage tied it to similar incidents, like the 2023 Missouri case where a teen was shot for ringing the wrong doorbell.

The event has renewed calls for clearer guidelines on self-defense. Gun rights groups stress training and awareness, while advocates for victims push for limits on when deadly force applies. It mirrors a pattern of wrong-place tragedies that claim innocent lives each year.

As the case heads to court, it could set precedents for how stand-your-ground laws handle errors. Families like Marias deserve justice, and communities need to balance safety with caution.

What do you think about this case? Share your thoughts in the comments below and spread the word by sharing this article to spark important conversations on self-defense and community safety.