Curious. If someone not in uniform, not showing a badge and in an unmarked personal vehicle showed up at your house and announced "Police" you would open the door and welcome them into your home?Shooting through a door is a big no-no.
Shooting a person who says "police" with no identification is a jury-flipper.
But I guess the grand jury in that county is full of cop-haters so good for the home-owner, he's free to go. This could have been ugly, like Sgt. Perry's manufactured murder case in commie Austin.
You have a gift for understatement.The trooper handled the situation WRONG.
Exactly. Someone displaying road rage, or what might appears to be road rage follows me home, I'm going to assume the worst and assume that person is a threat, and act accordingly.Alot happened prior to him "showing up at their door".
They had interactions with him on the road, and he had followed them home.
Yeah, follow me or Mrs. Hoji to Casa de Hoji after you show your ass road raging and it will be both a poor decision on their part and the worst loss of a game of flex nuts than they could have ever imagined.Alot happened prior to him "showing up at their door".
They had interactions with him on the road, and he had followed them home.
If nothing else, we know your account hasn't been hacked today!Yeah, follow me or Mrs. Hoji to Casa de Hoji after you show your ass road raging and it will be both a poor decision on their part and the worst loss of a game of flex nuts than they could have ever imagined.
I will tell y'all what. I think what bothered me most about this story beyond the trooper's behavior was the cops who took the homeowner into custody under the guise of "You shot a state trooper." I find this bias to be problematic. From what was described, they assumed his had done wrong because the person shot was in law enforcement. The homeowner shot a threat.
I don't totally disagree with your assessment, but those officers may have talked to the trooper that was shot before they talked to the homeowner, therefor his comments or statements might have biased the officers and the way they handled the situation.I will tell y'all what. I think what bothered me most about this story beyond the trooper's behavior was the cops who took the homeowner into custody under the guise of "You shot a state trooper." I find this bias to be problematic. From what was described, they assumed his had done wrong because the person shot was in law enforcement. The homeowner shot a threat.
How often are homeowners taken into custody and told, "You shot a musician." Some of y'all may be to young to remember when Carter Albrecht was beating on the door of a home in Dallas, demanding entry and his girlfriend. The homeowners told him to go away, were on the phone with 911, when the male homeowner shot Albrecht through the door and killed him. He was a musician for the New Bohemians. Nope, the cops arrived and did not even detain the homeowner. Albrecht was on Chantix and drinking (bad combination) and was apparently out of his mind and had the wrong house, scaring the hell out of the homeowner and his wife. My point is, do cops put people into cuffs and note that the occupation of the person shot to the homeowner shooter? Nope.
Proclaiming, "You shot a state trooper" sounds to me more like a contempt of cop response and maybe an intent to scare the homeowner (which it did) than actually being some sort of informative statement.
One really, really good reason to keep your mouth shut and your lawyer on speed dial. IIRC, the this case the homeowner was detained but not arrested. That tells me pretty early on that something was fishy (or I did not remember correctly).…Proclaiming, "You shot a state trooper" sounds to me more like a contempt of cop response and maybe an intent to scare the homeowner (which it did) than actually being some sort of informative statement.
No. Why?Curious. If someone not in uniform, not showing a badge and in an unmarked personal vehicle showed up at your house and announced "Police" you would open the door and welcome them into your home?
Yes.You do realize they were viewing the guy on their video camera?
Just because it is acceptable to some does not make it right. Had the homeowner missed (because he could not see his target), the potential for hitting an innocent bystander is there in a populated neighborhood.Shooting through the door? Not optimum, but acceptable and legal as past cases have proven.
It's always easy to sit back and play Monday-morning quarterback, and criticize the actions of others, especially when you were not there and participating.No. Why?
Yes.
And he was not holding a gun aimed at the door or in any other direction. He was no imminent threat.
Just because it is acceptable to some does not make it right. Had the homeowner missed (because he could not see his target), the potential for hitting an innocent bystander is there in a populated neighborhood.
I surely do not condone the trooper's actions. All I am saying is that I would not have shot blindly through a locked door. Hate me if you will. It is your M.O., your choice. I just don't have to agree with you, sorry.
I am gonna guess, after trooper was shot he called his agency and might have had a different version of events. I am shocked SWAT and helicopters were not sent.