Interesting Self-Defense Case

[cernjSHU]

Here is a perfect example that under the law in Texas this guy may have a valid self defense claim. The shooter is a guy that absolutely escalates the dispute by brandishing a firearm. The victim did not commit a crime nor was he threatening to commit a crime. Does a man like this deserve to escape jail? He shot an unarmed man. Was it reasonable for him to be put in fear of his life because the victim was bigger?

https://nypost.com/2021/11/26/texas-man-shoots-partners-ex-amid-child-custody-battle-video/https://nypost.com/2021/11/26/texas-man-shoots-partners-ex-amid-child-custody-battle-video/

 

[SHUSA]

this video is insane. nobody reacted like a guy was just killed right in front of them. certainly not the shooter.

the man was there legally to pick up his kids during his appointed time. the wife illegally refused and now the man is dead. in front of the kids.

i think the man with the gun is related in some way to the judge.

the shooter needs to he found guilty of something. this is crazy.

 

[Merge]

the shooter needs to he found guilty of something. this is crazy.

Agree, but unfortunately I don't see it playing out that way. He was a complete piece of shit for bringing out the gun in the first place, but once the father tried to take the gun from him I think the law is on his side.

 

[SHUSA]

Agree, but unfortunately I don't see it playing out that way. He was a complete piece of shit for bringing out the gun in the first place, but once the father tried to take the gun from him I think the law is on his side.

i guess fhe father is just supposed to go home and never have time with his kids. would take forever to bringnto court where the wife likely gets a slap on the wrist years go by, etc.

 

[knowknow456]

We cannot make an informed decision until Hall85 looks into the shooter's eyes and concludes on remorse.

 

[Merge]

i guess fhe father is just supposed to go home and never have time with his kids. would take forever to bringnto court where the wife likely gets a slap on the wrist years go by, etc.

Agree. It's just really messed up.
Trying to put myself in the shoes of the father trying to legally get his kids. He was already rightfully really angry, it would be really difficult to just walk away.

 

[SHUSA]

Agree. It's just really messed up.
Trying to put myself in the shoes of the father trying to legally get his kids. He was already rightfully really angry, it would be really difficult to just walk away.

its essentially some type of deadly entrapment

 

[sami]

As much as the shooter escalated the situation for introducing the rifle and probably was not necessary (and I say probably), the incident itself is 100% the fault of the victim.

He is on the man’s property. He is arguing with his ex-wife, who he can advance on at any moment in any way. The man emerges with a rifle and demands he leave the property, his property. He advances toward the man on his property when asked to leave. The man shoots the floor once, uh, gun is loaded. He advances on the man again. Man fires.

Sorry, as a father of two I feel badly for the guy losing his life. But he should have taken that up with the court, not by being a tough guy on someone else’s property.

 

[SHUSA]

As much as the shooter escalated the situation for introducing the rifle and probably was not necessary (and I say probably), the incident itself is 100% the fault of the victim.

He is on the man’s property. He is arguing with his ex-wife, who he can advance on at any moment in any way. The man emerges with a rifle and demands he leave the property, his property. He advances toward the man on his property when asked to leave. The man shoots the floor once, uh, gun is loaded. He advances on the man again. Man fires.

Sorry, as a father of two I feel badly for the guy losing his life. But he should have taken that up with the court, not by being a tough guy on someone else’s property.

umm the man is legally allowed to be there to pick up his kids. court appointed. not sure the mans property has anything to do with it. he wasnt trespassing.

how do u take that up in court? three years go by and you never see your kids?

people with guns need to be more accountable. this is not a situation where a man should lose his life. they engineered the problem by not giving him the kids (illegally) and they escalated the problem by bringing out a gun when they were illegally detaining his kids.

i think there is PLENTY of fault by the man with the gun and the ex wife. plenty.

 

[anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0]

As much as the shooter escalated the situation for introducing the rifle and probably was not necessary (and I say probably), the incident itself is 100% the fault of the victim.

He is on the man’s property. He is arguing with his ex-wife, who he can advance on at any moment in any way. The man emerges with a rifle and demands he leave the property, his property. He advances toward the man on his property when asked to leave. The man shoots the floor once, uh, gun is loaded. He advances on the man again. Man fires.

Sorry, as a father of two I feel badly for the guy losing his life. But he should have taken that up with the court, not by being a tough guy on someone else’s property.

Wrong.

 

[sami]

I’d put money on this. If someone was warranted to pick something up from my house, it wouldn’t give him the right to be in my property if I didn’t allow it.

not saying it’s right, guy was really a jerk. But he will not be convicted of anything.

 

[cernjSHU]

I’d put money on this. If someone was warranted to pick something up from my house, it wouldn’t give him the right to be in my property if I didn’t allow it.

not saying it’s right, guy was really a jerk. But he will not be convicted of anything.

I think the key issue will be provocation. The killer provoked the issue and escalated by coming out with a firearm. He could have called the police and should have. It seems like the victim was legally on the property to pick up the child.

Or will the provocation be judged as the victim grabbing the weapon?

Or is the initial provocation when the guy shoots the warning shot? Is he not using deadly force right there?

By firing the warning shot, does the victim have a right to protect himself from deadly force which was being used upon him?

 

[knowknow456]

The killer provoked the issue and escalated by coming out with a firearm.

Just to play devil's advocate.....this is Texas which I believe is a concealed carry state. I work off the assumption everyone is armed in Texas and if it were me I wouldn't want to be shot with my shotgun sitting under my pillow. At the first sign of escalation, I am going to protect myself.

 

[Merge]

I think the key issue will be provocation. The killer provoked the issue and escalated by coming out with a firearm. He could have called the police and should have. It seems like the victim was legally on the property to pick up the child.

Or will the provocation be judged as the victim grabbing the weapon?

Or is the initial provocation when the guy shoots the warning shot? Is he not using deadly force right there?

By firing the warning shot, does the victim have a right to protect himself from deadly force which was being used upon him?

fwiw - Interesting video on the case and the relevant law.
The guy makes a compelling argument that would probably sway my opinion towards voluntary manslaughter if I were on the jury.

 

[cernjSHU]

While I agree with him in the ultimate determination that he should not be entitled to use deadly force, he is using hyper technical aspects of the law which easily gets lost on a jury. His analysis based upon the time that the victim grabs the rifle and the time he actually shoots the victim is probably spot on legally in a technical sense. But, juries don't think that technical. The time that passes is mere seconds. This is a much closer case in the hands of a jury.

This would not be legally defensible here in NJ. But, in Texas and other stand your ground states, this is a very close case. And in my opinion, it should not be a close call.

 

[Pirata]

the incident itself is 100% the fault of the victim.

I agree.

If someone has a gun on you and you are unarmed, they own you. You need to back down and do whatever they say or risk being shot. End of story.

 

[SHUSA]

I agree.

If someone has a gun on you and you are unarmed, they own you. You need to back down and do whatever they say or risk being shot. End of story.

hard to think rationally when someone is illegally holding your kids hostage.

 

[HALL85]

hard to think rationally when someone is illegally holding your kids hostage.

Not a matter of rationale thinking; it’s self preservation

 

[SHUSA]

Not a matter of rationale thinking; it’s self preservation

the victim could be the one acting in self defense. grabbing a gun is an offensive stance, as he was the one holding the other mans kids hostage. he escalated the altercation by holding the kids and grabbing the gun.

if i wanted you dead, ill just steal your kid then when you come to my house ill toast you. self defense! does the court really want to set that precident?

 

[cernjSHU]

I agree.

If someone has a gun on you and you are unarmed, they own you. You need to back down and do whatever they say or risk being shot. End of story.

We are talking about criminal liability not about whether he should have preserved his own life by backing down. That is like saying its the people who jog in Central Park after 11 p.m. fault when they are robbed, raped or assaulted

 

[HALL85]

We are talking about criminal liability not about whether he should have preserved his own life by backing down. That is like saying its the people who jog in Central Park after 11 p.m. fault when they are robbed, raped or assaulted

I think he was speaking of using good judgment not criminal liability.

 

[Pirata]

That is like saying its the people who jog in Central Park after 11 p.m. fault when they are robbed, raped or assaulted

Apples and oranges.

That being said, the shooter committed the crime and should be prosecuted. Let a jury decide.

The victim may have bee right, unfortunately he is dead right.