Started By
Message

re: Houston shooter Grand Jury formed

Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:48 am to
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:48 am to
quote:

quote:

You are NPC too. You just cannot see it.
socially awkward dweeb
Congratulations!

You are now the recipient of the new “favorite phrase“ from one of the dumbest posters on this forum.

Enjoy.
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
298610 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:50 am to
quote:

You made an affirmative statement that in essence proclaims the POS was still alive and the final shot was the coup de grace.


He chooses the words that reflect his true beliefs.

Hopefully the shooter is celebrated. Our legal system is beyond broke, no one has faith in it anymore.

It only protects paychecks, not citizens.


Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:51 am to
Ooga, by definition, when a person has been killed, he has also been “incapacitated.” The two terms are not mutually exclusive.
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
298610 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:51 am to
quote:

You are now the recipient of the new “favorite phrase“ from one of the dumbest posters on this forum.


I agree with you. JClem is in your territory. Yall are so precious.
I'll bet you two have matching skirts today.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476331 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:53 am to
quote:

The criminal was in the process of committing aggravated robbery and that is covered by 9.31.

I'm not a TX criminal defense attorney so I'm not an expert but TYPICALLY the "process of committing" ends when the perp is subdued/thwarted.

That last shot is going to be a major issue for this guy. Key word: Immediate
This post was edited on 1/20/23 at 7:54 am
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
298610 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:54 am to
quote:

even with a shithead Soros DA with a finger on the scale.


Its Houston. They're desperately trying to be Californians.

Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476331 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:55 am to
quote:

I had no idea we had rules of engagement when being robbed at gun point.

Self defense has limits and there are "rules of engagement" if you're trying to use it a a legal defense for actions that would be criminal otherwise.
Posted by texas tortilla
houston
Member since Dec 2015
4567 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:56 am to
The criminal was in the process of committing aggravated robbery and that is covered by 9.31. you can't charge someone with an aggravated case if he has a toy pistol incapable of causing serious bodily harm. the shooter did not shoot to kill, he shot to stop. big difference. he was in fear of his life.
This post was edited on 1/20/23 at 8:00 am
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476331 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:56 am to
quote:

When you look at his criminal history I'd argue killing him is stopping a threat

I don't know if TX law will permit the defense attorney from discussing the "victim"'s criminal history. That will probably be a major pretrial fight (if this goes to trial)
Posted by oogabooga68
Member since Nov 2018
27194 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:56 am to
quote:

The two terms are not mutually exclusive.


Yes, I know.

I also know that your statement was intended to make people believe that he was still alive and the final "unnecessary" shot "finished" him.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that the perp was still alive?
This post was edited on 1/20/23 at 7:58 am
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:58 am to
You are correct, but you are wasting your breath. You are young and still believe that one can educate the WILLFULLY ignorant.

There will always be people who will not WANT to learn, if that education would in any way interfere with their biases and preconceptions.
Posted by Eighteen
Member since Dec 2006
37399 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:58 am to
quote:

TYPICALLY the "process of committing" ends when the perp is subdued/thwarted. That last shot is going to be a major issue for this guy. Key word: Immediate


It’s just absurd to me we force citizens to make this call while in the act, especially when they are the ones being victimized in the moment.

You had a gun shoved in your face by this guy, people were cowering under their tables in fear, the guy in the corner with his hands up probably having his entire life flash before his eyes. A hard working tax paying business with employees trying to earn a living having their life flash before their eyes.

All of these people will never emotionally be the same. Every restaurant they go to or every time they go out in public they will have flashbacks of this.

Yet our legal system ignores all of this and refuses to prosecute or lock up criminals who commit these crimes that terrorize communities.

But then decides it’s time to “take seriously” when citizens finally stand up for themselves and have had enough.

It’s all fricked
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476331 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 7:59 am to
quote:

The criminal was in the process of committing aggravated robbery

When the initial shots occurred? Certainly. I can't imagine those will be an issue.

When the final shot occurred? Debatable, and I'm sure that's the DA's argument/theory of the case.

quote:

and that is covered by 9.31.

Immediate
Posted by oogabooga68
Member since Nov 2018
27194 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 8:00 am to
quote:

Debatable,


Or in legal terms "reasonable doubt".....
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 8:00 am to
quote:

I don't know if TX law will permit the defense attorney from discussing the "victim"'s criminal history. That will probably be a major pretrial fight (if this goes to trial)
It will not be much of an argument.

The prosecutor will make a pro forma effort, the defense attorney will object immediately, and the judge will shut the prosecutor down before the defense lawyer finishes voicing his objection.

It will all be handled in pre-trial proceedings, and the jury will not even know that the fight took place.
This post was edited on 1/20/23 at 8:03 am
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476331 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 8:01 am to
quote:

It’s just absurd to me we force citizens to make this call while in the act, especially when they are the ones being victimized in the moment.

The law is not built to support direct, physical response to physical threats. Self defense is a very small exception carved out from this general theme to permit a direct response in limited circumstances. That's how criminal law has been organized (in the West, at least) since Rome.

quote:

You had a gun shoved in your face by this guy,

And shooting him at that moment was fine. I don't think anyone is arguing about the initial shots.

AFTER those shots, the shooter MAY not have been an immediate threat anymore. You don't get to keep shooting if that's true.

Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476331 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 8:03 am to
quote:

The prosecutor will make a pro forma effort, the defense attorney will object immediately, and the judge will shut the prosecutor down before the defense lawyer finishes voicing his objection.

Wrong victim. The deceased's criminal history. The defense would want to enter this into evidence and the prosecutor would object.

I'm sure TX hsa a statute similar to our 404 that permits the shooter's criminal history to be used.
Posted by Tbonepatron
Member since Aug 2013
8462 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 8:04 am to
quote:

Kim Ogg.


Posted by oogabooga68
Member since Nov 2018
27194 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 8:05 am to


quote:


It will not be much of an argument.



quote:

If the felony conviction is one in which the penalty range was death or more than one year in prison.
If the crime required proof that the person was dishonest as an element the conviction is admissible in trial, regardless of if the crime is a felony.

The crime must be less than 10 years old to be admissible, unless it can be shown that the evidence is more important in the trial than the prejudice that it would cause to the convicted person.


Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
298610 posts
Posted on 1/20/23 at 8:06 am to
quote:

but you are wasting your breath.
\

Gemius, most understand the issue but are pulling for no true bill.
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram