Texas SOT

Houston Car Jacking one bad guy dead- victim to face Grand Jury

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Texan2

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Nov 8, 2008
    7,932
    21
    South of San Antonio
    No shit. Semantics aside, I quoted and articulated the relevant portions of Texas lethal force law. He had more than enough including disparity of force with multiple attackers.
    Take it easy guy. Someone points out that you are quoting a non existant law in our state and your answer is "no shit"? Somewhat condescending considering it was YOU who quoted a non existant law.

    Here is a tip I give to many of the new members. You catch more bees with honey....

    Welcome to the forum.
     

    cpileri

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 11, 2011
    251
    1
    near Fort Hood (Killeen)
    Protection of 3rd person property

    9.42 covers theft, criminal mischief, robbery and aggravated robbery anywhere. Arson and burglary are covered under 9.42 for your own property, and a third persons property if you meet the requirements of protection of a third persons property.

    Sir,
    what are the requirements of protection of a third person's property?

    Anecdotally: i was told in a CHL class that if i want someone to house-sit for me, say while I was on vacation, that I should instruct them to manage the property as if it were their own and pay the sitter $1 to do so. Reasons had to do w making it "official". I never looked into it, but i always thought a statement of legal use (similar to the document you give your friend while hunting on your property to cover him against trespassing etc) was a better idea. but not sure on any of that.

    Many thanks for your expertise!
    C-
     

    Charlie

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Mar 19, 2008
    65,572
    96
    'Top of the hill, Kerr County!
    Just a bit of information, grand juries look at ALL felony cases. Also, many people don't realize that grand juries do not decide guilt or innocence, they decide if a crime has been committed and could the person accused have committed the crime.
     

    dvmpiper

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 19, 2013
    181
    1
    Terrell, Tx
    Well, I would say, in my limited understanding, that if the carjackers had taken the victim's keys and were in the vehicle, they were in possession of stolen property and fleeing the scene with said. Nevermind if they took his wallet or whatever, just more of the same. Pretty cut and dried in my mind. I think we are all in agreement that the victim will not face penalty for his actions.
     
    Last edited:

    txinvestigator

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    14,204
    96
    Ft Worth, TX
    Just a bit of information, grand juries look at ALL felony cases. Also, many people don't realize that grand juries do not decide guilt or innocence, they decide if a crime has been committed and could the person accused have committed the crime.

    Yep. GJ's job is to determine if there is probable cause to try a person for a crime. yes=True Bill (an indictment) and no =No Bill. And to clarify, no felony can go to trial without a true bill from a GJ. IN many felony cases, the DA dismisses or does not present to a GJ based on merits. However, he RARELY does so in cases of homicide.

    Also, there is no double jeopardy attached to the Grand Jury decision
     
    Last edited:

    txinvestigator

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    14,204
    96
    Ft Worth, TX
    Well, I would say, in my limited understanding, that if the carjackers had taken the victim's keys and were in the vehicle, they were in possession of stolen property and fleeing the scene with said. Nevermind the if they took his wallet or whatever, just more of the same. Pretty cut and dried in my mind. I think we are all in agreement that the victim will not face penalty for his actions.

    Being in possession of stolen property is not the justification for deadly force.
     

    txinvestigator

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    14,204
    96
    Ft Worth, TX
    No shit. Semantics aside, I quoted and articulated the relevant portions of Texas lethal force law. He had more than enough including disparity of force with multiple attackers.

    You are fairly new. use wrong terminology and terrible spelling and talk about castle doctrine and now "lethal force law" (Texas has use of force law, but the word lethal is never used) so pardon us when we look a little closely at your conclusions. ;)

    That said, I am interested in specifically HOW the Castle Doctrine applies in this case. What sections and wording makes deadly force justified in the case where a guy was yanked out of his car by multiple attackers who then took the victim's car?

    How does the justification work? In other words, how is the justification in penal code 9.02 applied in a deadly force case?
     

    Sammy654d

    New Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 30, 2013
    19
    1
    Austin Metro
    Lethal = Deadly. Minor semantics again. From the article, the man was forced out of his car by the perps. Then he got robbed. He met the requirements of 9.31 so go to 9.32 for lethal force green light. This is clear cut. Texas law defines his use of force reasonable. Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another: (1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and (2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary: (A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or (B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery. (b) The actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if the actor: (1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the deadly force was used: (A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; (B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;
     

    txinvestigator

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    14,204
    96
    Ft Worth, TX
    Lethal = Deadly. Minor semantics again. From the article, the man was forced out of his car by the perps.
    We do not say perps in Texas. And words have meaning. Please use correct terminology.
    Then he got robbed. He met the requirements of 9.31 so go to 9.32 for lethal force green light.
    Please explain. What are the requirements, specifically, that were met in 9.31 and 9.32?
    This is clear cut. Texas law defines his use of force reasonable. Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another: (1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and (2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary: (A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or (B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery. (b) The actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if the actor: (1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the deadly force was used: (A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; (B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;

    Where do you see if certain things happen your use of force or deadly force is reasonable? I missed that.

    Also, how does the law work if you DO meet the requirements of 9.31 and 9.32? Can a person be arrested, charged, indicted? Or if they meet those requirements do they have to be let go by the police?
     

    40Arpent

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jul 16, 2008
    7,061
    31
    Houston
    Secondly, if one guy was running away when he was shot, he was not.....fleeing with stolen property immediately after committing theft during the nighttime.

    i don't get this statement. Why does him running away preclude the possibility that he was carrying property that he had just stolen?
     

    txinvestigator

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    14,204
    96
    Ft Worth, TX
    Secondly, if one guy was running away when he was shot, he was not committing theft during the nighttime, nor fleeing with stolen property immediately after committing theft during the nighttime. That assumes he did not steal something. It is not legal to shoot someone fleeing from a crime unless they are escaping with property, and there are severe restrictions on that.

    Third, grand juries always hear homicide cases, and since a man was killed, it is a homicide.

    i don't get this statement. Why does him running away preclude the possibility that he was carrying property that he had just stolen?

    Make sense?
     

    Shady

    The One And Only
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 24, 2013
    4,656
    96
    I feel bad or the poor guy



    trying to get all the blood stains out is going to be a pain
     
    Top Bottom