Manslaughter or self-defense??
- Thread starter kaz109
- Start date
Lesson learned, don't fight a man who has a gun, ON HIS PROPERTY.
Things to take away from this:
...
...
...
Don't get married
Pull out
...
...
...
Don't get married
Pull out
It's stupid on both sides and could easily have been avoided. I do think Reed had a reason to be as mad as he was and if he had beat the shit out of that little bitch I would be all for it because you don't keep a man from his kids, especially if you aren't blood and there isn't a valid reason. But... the toss off the porch and the follow up shot I would say are well within the bounds of what Texas law covers. I would probably want to charge the shooter based simply off intent and his attempt at withholding the kid but I know that the law doesn't work that way. His actions angered the father, justifiably, and I would expect any father in the same position to be as angry as Reed. So from my own perspective, Carruth deserved death more than Reed did in that scenario.
Im not sure where you are getting that property owner was keeping the kids away from the father ???
EVEN IF that was the case, you have to be smarter than that, bro….
dadda was retardadda
I'll admit that my knowledge of the case is the extent of this thread, but was that not the reason for the argument? I thought Reed was mad because short dude wasn't letting him take his son during his custody?
My understanding of the situation is that dad was upset (rightfully so) about the mom violating set court agreement in regards to visitation/shared custody rights… But where dadda ****ed up is when he allowed his anger / frustration to get him to tresspass into the baby momma’s boyfriend’s property, after being told that the kid(s) werent there, acting tough / aggressive towards the property owner and then going hands on / grabbing said property owner’s rifle in an aggressive manner….
I was being pretty strict with my thought process on it, and of you read it again I did say that I think it was a good shoot. Your past post said that the shooter looks out of line from that other angle when he is getting tossed off the porch, but I don't think so. He followed up pretty much immediately with his shots and I think the threats against him leading up to that are enough evidence to legally allow him to protect himself with deadly force under Texas law. Just on a personal level and from my own moral compass I think the shooter deserved to be on the receiving end of at least a beating for playing into that scheme of keeping the child away. Bottom line is I can see why it is so hard to file charges. Both had good reasons for their actions and they should have just walked away until they had cooler heads.
You didnt follow me correctly… I originally felt (and still feel) that the dad earned the lead. Shoot me! Lol.
But i also later acknowledged, that from a legal standpoint, property owner might get in trouble because although the situation was initially covered under self defense law, once he got tossed 7 yrds away, the dad wasnt coming after him or advancing, so technically fear of death or injury was null at that point….
I see. We aren't too far off. The dad was stupid for sure for messing around like that like the homeowner didn't have a rifle in his hands. I can't argue with the whole play stupid games thing. I'm more arguing the point that at the root of it, aside from the physical conflict, that the dad has a right to be pissed to the point of wanting to physically beat someone to a pulp. His actions alone pushed the homeowner to do what he did. If the dad had stayed civil the entire time and got shot then you would likely see charges filed against the shooter. I don't think the altercation should have resulted in deadly force but it ended up that way. I also think the homeowner acted pretty quickly after being tossed off the porch. He appeared to pull up as soon as he caught his footing and took the shot. Had he waited a half second or more then I would argue your point in that he had enough time to assess that the dad wasn't being aggressive. It really is a hard case to judge because there is justification everywhere!
Excluding all the back story and simply considering the shooting part. @ZYBORG I think when he is tossed off the porch the situation escalates into immediate use of deadly force. Reason being, is that now a person that doesn’t belong on the property has access to the front door unencumbered. This isn’t like a lot of shootings and debates here where it usually happens in public space. With those the “arena” is the two people arguing. Here it is the house/property and that changes thing immensely in my opinion.
Just remember, you cannot have manslaughter without the laughter.
Sent from my iPhone using svtperformance.com
Sent from my iPhone using svtperformance.com
thats a great point. Like I said, in my eyes, dad guy earned the lead. But because of a small technicality, I could see how some would like to bring on charges (not that I would agree with it).
I still think they need to charge the shooter with being a little bitch.
I’ve been in several chest bumping altercations in my life, even some I knew would certainly end with me having my ass handed back to me. I never once ran inside to get a gun, the thought never even crossed my mind.
But then again, I’ve never been afraid of an ass whoopin either.
I’ve been in several chest bumping altercations in my life, even some I knew would certainly end with me having my ass handed back to me. I never once ran inside to get a gun, the thought never even crossed my mind.
But then again, I’ve never been afraid of an ass whoopin either.
/thread
Grand jury no billed him, he will not be indicted.
Users who are viewing this thread
