Not knowing the age of the teenager (experience a concern) or why the 48-year-old man was able to enter the home or why he had with him a metal cane (needed it for his ailment?), even the physical difference in the two individuals not discussed, so what would I do differently?
Avoidance it not always a first or even possible choice, although attorney DeWitt is correct in stating it as a good choice. Let’s consider the teen as young and in fear for his life from a much larger assailant (let’s also infer), escaping to the Kitchen (?) to obtain a knife while being pursued (?) by his assailant gives the youngster a chance for defense. If he did not know the man (?), multiple stab wounds would be likely, since he was pumping adrenalin, was in pain, and had little awareness of what it would take to stop the attack. Escaping to a room with a door would delay his attacker, but then he is merely cornered. Could he get out of the house? The teen’s thought processes are only to choose a better weapon for defense than the metal cane. The police were correct in not charging the youngster.
In a similar circumstance, I might have retreated upstairs (?) to my room, barricaded the door and escaped through a window. Stairs and door would delay attacker and give me time for this action. No stairs? Use whatever furniture and throwable objects (lamps, for example) I could to distract and delay approach of attacker as I found an outside door to exit house. Go to neighbor, call police.