Posted on 11/16/2007 2:47:22 PM PST by Sopater
Most interesting.
No, the 911 call shows that he didn’t want to do this. It even captures his “Don’t move, or you’re dead” statement to the criminals.
I seriously doubt he will be prosecuted.
Plus, both the guys he killed already had criminal records.
This is Texas.
He is covered by (1).
This will be no-billed by the Grand Jury pronto.
There’s a lot of shootings out that way.
Meanwhile in Galveston a millionaire “accidently” killed his neighbor, chopped up the body, and threw it away at sea. He walks a free man today.
THe smartest thing in my opinion would’ve been to call 911 AFTER the shooting was over.
Ouch... this may turn into a really difficult case.
I dunno what the law is in Texas, and I would love to have this guy for MY neighbor, but he may be in big trouble.
The argument he might make is that he had every right to stop a crime in progress against his neighbor. He ordered the perp(s) to stop. The perp made some threatening action (hopefully) and he then defended himself.
It doesn’t help his case that he started out telling the operator that he was going to shoot, and that was before he was personally threatened at all.
Dang. I’d give him the benefit of the doubt, but not all juries may do that.
Ah... nice law you got there. That may save him.
In Houston there was a man who had a home invasion and shot one of the men INSIDE his house climbing up his internal staircase.
The driver got away and later turned himself in. There were no charges on the surviving member of the home invasion team, meanwhile the shooter had to defend himself (and he was cleared) in the death.
When he asked the police for the name of the other man, they refused to provide it. When he asked what precautions he should take to protect his family, he was advised to “circle the block twice” before ever entering his garage.
Chuck Rosenthal is not self-defense friendly but he certainly botched the defense of the State’s same-sex sodomy law. Will his arm stretch to Pasadena in this shooting?
Not necessarily. Course, doesn't make any difference now.
In Texas, no, it’s not. He’d apprehended them and was holding them at gunpoint. He told them not to escape, they attempted to do so, he shot them.
Texas has *no* duty to retreat or not shoot a fleeing felon, especially at night.
If they were illegals, he’s done for.
If they were Americans, he’ll be fine.
If I were the neighbor, I'd testify that I asked him to look after my house even if I didn't. And I'd buy him another box of ammunition as a thank you gift.
(( ping ))
This didn’t happen at night, and there’s no evidence that the shooter was in fear for his life, even after making his verbal warning.
The guys undoubtedly tried to flee.
I’d argue that they were fleeing felons who had been put under citizen’s arrest. The fact they were unquestionably committing a felonious act at the time is going to be enough. I would be SHOCKED if Texas prosecuted this guy.
was this shooting in texas or pasadena cal.?
Am I correct in assuming this is a formality, mainly to protect him from civil suit liability?
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.