Listed To This Article: Play in new window | Download | Embed

You can also subscribe via Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | | More

SPOTSYLVANIA COUNTY, VA — A homeowner in Virginia is facing a murder charge after allegedly shooting and killing an 18-year-old during what teens claim was a social media prank — but one that may not be as innocent as it sounds.

The homeowner, a 27-year-old Spotsylvania County resident, has been charged with second-degree murder, malicious wounding, and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. The incident occurred around 3 a.m. Saturday at a residence on McKenzie Lane, just hours before the deceased teen was scheduled to attend his high school prom.

According to the Spotsylvania County Sheriff’s Office, the homeowner reported that three individuals were attempting to break into his home. He opened fire, fatally wounding one teen and grazing another. A third teen was not injured.

However, the surviving teens gave a different account. They said they were recording videos for TikTok, specifically claiming they were performing a prank known as “ding-dong ditch” — ringing doorbells and running away. One teen even provided detectives with a phone containing similar videos recorded earlier that evening.

As reported by NBC Washington, the sheriff’s office has not confirmed whether the evidence supports the teens’ version of events or the homeowner’s account of a break-in. The commonwealth’s attorney is currently reviewing the facts to determine if the use of force was justified.

But the story may be more complicated than a simple prank. After experiencing a similar event firsthand, it’s clear that some of these so-called pranks can be far more aggressive. What I later learned after a personal encounter last year is that there is also a trend called the “TikTok Door Kick Challenge.” Unlike traditional “ding-dong ditch” antics, this challenge involves teens violently kicking front doors to shock or scare the residents — a far more threatening and invasive act.

In my own case (video shown above), two teens from the neighborhood back-kicked the front door of my girlfriend’s home and ran off — all within seconds. We were sitting just feet away, I barely had time to react. Reviewing the video later made it clear that this wasn’t a harmless prank — it was an aggressive act designed to provoke a reaction.

That context raises a critical question in the Spotsylvania case: were these teens ringing doorbells as part of a prank, or were they participating in the TikTok Door Kick Challenge, which involves forcefully kicking doors to simulate a break-in? The difference matters — not just in perception, but in how a homeowner might interpret the intent behind the action. At first glance, a loud, aggressive door kick can appear to be a genuine forced entry attempt. But if the individuals immediately run off, as they often do in these challenges, it complicates any claim of an ongoing threat. We don’t yet know what exactly happened in this case, and further details, such as surveillance footage or forensic evidence, will be essential to determining what actions were reasonable.

Speaking from personal experience, if I had responded with gunfire during a similar incident at my girlfriend’s home, I don’t believe it would have been justified. The kids kicked the door and ran off within seconds. If the kicking had continued or escalated, arming oneself could be a more understandable response. Another important consideration is the issue of shooting through a closed door — something that may or may not have occurred in this case. Generally, it’s a risky decision. You can’t identify who or what is on the other side, and there’s the potential danger of bullets exiting your home and endangering others. In any defensive situation, identifying the threat clearly and ensuring your actions are legally and morally defensible should be the priority.