Posted on 09/21/2012 5:54:57 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
Houston area investigators are looking into a stand-your-ground case where after a minor fender-bender, a 22-year-old white male was shot and killed by a 23-year-old black woman. During a morning commute, Crystal Scott and Jonathan Ables were in an accident and pulled into a Shell gasoline station to survey the damage.
According to Scott, Ables exited his truck and ran toward her driver-side door. Scott said he yelled and then hit her door and tried to open it. Fearing for her life, Scott pulled her pistol and shot Ables once through the driver’s window and struck him in the chest. Ables died at the scene.
A Harris County Sheriff’s spokesman, Sgt. Felipe Rivera said “From what we understand it was maybe just a minor accident,” while adding, “The information we’re getting is that it appeared to be a minor accident that turned into road rage.”
>snip<
An eyewitness, who appeared on camera but has requested anonymity, said that he did not hear any threat in the seconds before Scott killed Ables. The witness was pumping gas and standing 15 feet away from Ables when a bullet ricocheted past him and struck his car. The bullet left a noticeable impression on the witness’s car.
As for Scott’s version of events, the witness said that if Ables had shouted or banged on the car, he would have heard it. “What drew my attention was the gunshot,” said the witness. “I just want to be sure that I do everything in my power that everything is fair. I care about it being fair,” he said. The Harris County sheriff’s department has not yet responded to Spero News’ request for any security footage of the shooting.
(Excerpt) Read more at speroforum.com ...
“It took only four posts for race to be mentioned. With ten posts, we’d seen “Hatred of whites is a cultural value of the American black community.” Ten of the first 28 comments had a racial angle to them.”
I think most of that is understandable in light of the Trayvon Martin case and the black community’s reaction to it. Some of those comments were clearly sarcastic references to that incident, seeing as the pigmentation is reversed in this case.
“It’s her word against nobody because the only other person who knew what Ables did is Ables himself. And he’s dead.”
Well, it may look that way because we only have one other witness commenting in any detail in the news reports. There is at least one other witness who saw some of the events, namely the passenger in Ables’ vehicle, and there could be fifty more that we don’t know about. As well as the cameras that most likely captured the whole incident. So, in the end, we’ll probably have a pretty good idea of what happened, independent of what she is saying.
mistyping ~ assuming it was a roadrage sort of thing ~ we had been discussing various carjacking situations.
mistyping ~ assuming it was a roadrage sort of thing ~ we had been discussing various carjacking situations.
I can vouch for the elemental honesty and integrity of anyone, black, white or otherwise, who is overweight and middle-aged. We didn't get there telling lies ~
Again, all he had to do was walk up and place his hand on the door handle and she had all the reason she needed to feel threatened and, under the law, use whatever force she thought was justified to protect herself. You may not like it. It is a tragedy that things turned out the way that they did. I can’t say what was going through her mind when she pulled the trigger. But none of that is reason enough to ignore the law. And by Texas law she was justified in using whatever force she thought was necessary to prevent him from even attempting to open that car door. If people down there think it was all wrong then they need to change the law from their end.
A commenter on the original story claims to have gone to high school with the vic and that he "had an authority problem, he thought he was the toughest and baddest".
On the other hand, why did she not simply drive off?
Not if she had her door locked as it was and not if she agreed to talk with him and then pulled over and parked and not if they were at a Shell station with people coming and going getting gas with one witness 15 feet away.
No reasonable person would feel so threatened under those circumstances to off another person.
“including a fat middle aged white guy who says everything the lady says is true.”
Do you have a link to where you read that maybe? I just ask because I’ve read a few stories on this and haven’t heard anything like that.
Scott called 911 before pulling into the Shell station because she was concerned about the man's actions following the collision, authorities said.
So then what did 911 tell her to do and did she do it.
Here we go from the Houston Chronicle:
Sheriff’s deputies found the man in the Shell parking lot with what appeared to be two gunshot wounds to his upper chest area.
She shot him twice.
Good questions. What's on the 911 recording? And what did the various video cameras in the area record?
In both the GZ case and this one, the shooter called 911. One does not call 911 if one is intending to murder somebody.
The story from the Chronicle says she shot him twice.
Okay then what do you think was going through her mind when she pulled the trigger the second time.
She shot him twice in the upper chest.
Even then.
No reasonable person would feel so threatened under those circumstances to off another person.
Reasonable has nothing to do with it. The law is the law.
She felt threatened and used the force she felt necessary to defend herself. What you you think was going through her mind?
She shot him twice in the upper chest.
So she grouped her shots. And your point is?
There only appeared to be one hole in the car window. So, did she shoot him through the window, then exit the car and shoot him again? That’s going to be pretty hard to justify.
“So she grouped her shots. And your point is?”
With only one hole in the car window, I don’t think she grouped her shots. It may turn out that she shot him, then got out of the car and finished him off.
I guess the standard of Trayvon is not in effect?
It has everything to do with it.
Reason is part of the law.
It's not enough to say you felt threatened and shot, the judge/jury has to be convinced that you felt threatened and the measure of that is a "reasonable person" in that circumstance.
And would a reasonable person feel that threatened that she would shoot him twice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.