Texas - Homeowner Fatally Shoots Intruder

[terraformer]

This only refers to criminal mischief/theft.

The whole topic of conversation has been about theft. Lets face it, arson and robbery require force to commit. So in the end, defense of property alone, without any other acts of violence is going to be theft.

to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;

 

[Kalahari]

Ummm... No.

The way I read it, "during the nighttime" is specifically referring to theft and criminal mischief, and not to arson, burglary, and aggravated robbery. IANAL.

 

[terraformer]

By the way, it has been ruled that taking any effort to enter, including raising a window or turning a door knob, is "with force".

BS. Show me that. It flies in the face of the definitions of burglary and robbery. Breaking and entry can occur without property damage, but that is called non-forcible entry.

 

[Kalahari]

The whole topic of conversation has been about theft. Lets face it, arson and robbery require force to commit. So in the end, defense of property alone, without any other acts of violence is going to be theft.

I'm just referring to your original statement that Texas does not allow the use of deadly force in defense of property in the daytime, in which case it does, as seen in that deadly force is acceptable when someone is committing arson, burglary, robbery, or aggravated robbery against you/your property.

 

[SecondAmdFirst]

I'm just referring to your original statement that Texas does not allow the use of deadly force in defense of property in the daytime, in which case it does, as seen in that deadly force is acceptable when someone is committing arson, burglary, robbery, or aggravated robbery against you/your property.

I believe he was responding to my question re-directing it to MA law. My bad for hijacking the thread.

 

[Kalahari]

I believe he was responding to my question re-directing it to MA law. My bad for hijacking the thread.

Yes, and he clearly stated that deadly force in defense of property was inappropriate unless at night. My reading of the law is different than his. I'm interested in knowing who is right because I live in Texas. Maybe a lawyer can chime in..

 

[HooVooLoo]

... I'm interested in knowing who is right because I live in Texas. Maybe a lawyer can chime in..

Now THAT is a telling statement. The fact that NES has the attention of people from the USofT must mean that the discussions here are healthy, robust and has an effect on the whole country's idea about what may or may not be, or should or should not be, legal when it comes to firearms. Go NES.

 

[Kalahari]

Now THAT is a telling statement. The fact that NES has the attention of people from the USofT must mean that the discussions here are healthy, robust and has an effect on the whole country's idea about what may or may not be, or should or should not be, legal when it comes to firearms. Go NES.

I lived in Massachusetts when I joined the site and still visit regularly. Technically, I'm a resident of Massachusetts, but that'll be fixed soon...

 

[Kalahari]

The grown ups who pay for Kalahari's little jaunt in Texas live in MA.

They aren't paying for it.

 

[KBCraig]

BS. Show me that.

Yeah, I'll get right on that as soon as you quit ignoring my refutation of your mis-statement about authorized use of deadly force in Texas.

 

[terraformer]

Yeah, I'll get right on that as soon as you quit ignoring my refutation of your mis-statement about authorized use of deadly force in Texas.

I didn't ignore anything. Burglary != Robbery, Robbery != B&E and B&E != entering with force. You asserted the last is entering with force if you just try the door knob. I say no. Therefore, use of deadly force rests on self defense and not property defense.

 

[Kalahari]

Therefore, use of deadly force rests on self defense and not property defense.

And yet Joe Horn received a "no-bill" when he used deadly force in defense of property of a third party during broad daylight...

 

[terraformer]

And yet Joe Horn received a "no-bill" when he used deadly force in defense of property of a third party during broad daylight...

IIRC, that was a grand jury, not a prosecutor's decision. Grand juries can nullify just as easily as juries, though I don't believe it is common for them to do so.

ETA: And actually, if I remember, there was a significant question of what the individuals were doing when they were shot. I believe they were running towards him which figured heavily in the question of legality. They were also shot on his property, not his neighbors which also figured in the legal interpretation.

 

[KBCraig]

Therefore, use of deadly force rests on self defense and not property defense.

Well, thank you for that. Earlier you stated:

The whole topic of conversation has been about theft.

And clearly, it has not. It has been about home invasion. Theft != Robbery, to borrow your logic. Robbery is theft from a person. There were persons involved here, else there wouldn't have been a homeowner shooting back.

Check Texas PC 30.02 for the definition of burglary.

 

[Kalahari]

IIRC, that was a grand jury, not a prosecutor's decision. Grand juries can nullify just as easily as juries, though I don't believe it is common for them to do so.

ETA: And actually, if I remember, there was a significant question of what the individuals were doing when they were shot. I believe they were running towards him which figured heavily in the question of legality. They were also shot on his property, not his neighbors which also figured in the legal interpretation.

They were shot while running away. Again, my reading of Section 9.42 is that the law is clear that the "nighttime" prerequisite is only applicable to theft and criminal mischief. I'm not finding anything online that says that Castle Law Doctrine in Texas in defense of property is only applicable at night, but perhaps you can shed some light/links.

 

[drgrant]

IIRC, that was a grand jury, not a prosecutor's decision. Grand juries can nullify just as easily as juries, though I don't believe it is common for them to do so.

It's probably heavily likely to occur in a place like TX. Regardless of what the law says, protecting property (or people) for that matter, the system and the public tend to give people a lot of leeway there. In a place like TX you -really- have to screw up to get put in jail for defending yourself, especially if the act of defense occurs in your own home.

-Mike

 

[Stef]

I'll cry him a river. A parent's job is to raise and teach their kids to do the right thing in life.......obviously this guy failed.

Obviously, you're a dolt. You can't teach those who are unwilling to learn.

I think you take that Three Percent thing too literally. Try using more than 3% of your brain on occasion, we'll all benefit from it.

 

[KingPing]

What a terrible thing to have to deal with for everyone involved. Credit to the Dad for seeing the situation for what it was.

 

[TomH]

Are you guys really going back and forth about this? If someone busts in your house, you aren't going to have time to consider the particular castle doctrine scenario that is or isn't presenting itself, reminding yourself that you live in MA and will be under close scrutiny, etc. You're going to react and protect yourself and your family. Either that or end up dead perhaps. YMMV.

 

[06LemansC6]

Are you guys really going back and forth about this? If someone busts in your house, you aren't going to have time to consider the particular castle doctrine scenario that is or isn't presenting itself, reminding yourself that you live in MA and will be under close scrutiny, etc. You're going to react and protect yourself and your family. Either that or end up dead perhaps. YMMV.

+1 probably the best post in this thread.

 

[SecondAmdFirst]

Are you guys really going back and forth about this? If someone busts in your house, you aren't going to have time to consider the particular castle doctrine scenario that is or isn't presenting itself, reminding yourself that you live in MA and will be under close scrutiny, etc. You're going to react and protect yourself and your family. Either that or end up dead perhaps. YMMV.

That is how thing should occur. Protecting your life should NEVER be infringed by the law.