Another win for the good guys in Texas

[GrizzLeeBear]

Just read this.

Man Cleared for Killing Neighbor's Burglars

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=5278638&page=1

[Bret4207]

I don't think I would have done what he did in those circumstances, but it appears the Grand Jury considered it justified. Good enough for me.

[Charley]

Sorry, the so called "castle doctrine" had nothing to do with it. The event took place before the legislation went into effect, the case would be tried under the laws existing at the time.

The Grand Jury just nobilled the guy, it's fairly common.

[HeavyMetal]

Sadly I figure the fiance is already booking a lawyer for the "wrongful" death lawsuit.

Hopefully he'll survive that as well!

[fatnhappy]

I wouldn't mind having a couple neighbors like Joe.

[Meatco1]

Good for Joe Horn!!

If there were more like him, I imagine the crime rate would have a sudden drop!!

Richard

[bruce drake]

Joe should contact the NRA for a gun-friendly lawyer (there are a few out there) to counter sue or pressure the DA to bring charges for the girlfriend for harboring a known illegal alien. There shouldn't be any reason for an "aquaintance" to drop a civil suit against him as there is no legal basis like a wife for her to sue.

I believe we have a book that says you should be your brother's keeper. That in itself is why Joe did what he did. He may not have known his new neighbors well but he did defend what they had worked for. Give me a concerned citizen anyday over an apathetic one.

Bret -- We agree on 99.44% of the time, but if someone was trying to drive your prize tractor out of your garage or loading your molds and melting pot into their truck or taking your kid's stereo out the window of your house, I'd use my truck rifle (remember - I can't legally carry a pistol in New York yet - still waiting for the permit application to clear...) to detain them. If I thought I was outnumbered and in danger of my own life, I wouldn't have a hesitation to disable (center shots are disabling aren't they?) one or two of the burglars while I was waiting for the police to respond. Remember, most sane people will stop when they see a barrel pointing at them. Those two burglars that Joe Horn shot actually were advancing on him when he told them to stop on the 911 tape. "Stop or your dead" I believe was his words. Pretty simple instructions to follow. The girlfriend doesn't try to hide the fact that her boyfriend was a burglar. She claimed that because he was an illegal he couldn't find a proper job - that tells me him and his friend were career criminals and she is trying to blame our society for their actions.
The men had many choices in thier lives. Thier last ones were to not steal and the other was to not move when confronted by a Good Samaritan who caught them in the act. Two wrong choices that lead to them committing suicide by Joe Horn's shotgun

Bruce

[TexasJeff]

If the fiance tries to bring a civil suit against Mr. Horn, I'll strongly consider filing a friend of the court petition on Mr. Horn's behalf, and then going after the fiance.

So far, we would have her dead to rights on--

1. Harboring a fugitive (all illegal aliens are considered fugitives--or they were when I was with the feds some years back), which is a felony.

2. Conspiracy--she knew her boyfriend was a burglar and by giving him shelter and relief, she became part of his conspiracy to commit felonies.

3. Aiding and abetting--after the illegal puke did his stealing, she knew about it (by self-admission), but did nothing to bring this to the attention of law enforcement. The 5th doesn't apply to her since she refers to him as "her boyfriend" and not spouse. If she tries claiming common-law, it will be post facto.

If this wench tries to sue him, I hope TSRA musters the troops. Judges are elected here in Texas. We can damn sure promise whatever robed idiot that agrees to take the case that he/she is toast.

Jeff

[Bret4207]

Bruce- I understand what you're saying, but according to the report I read he shot both in the back. I don't know what the whole story was, but in NY he'd have a hard time getting off. As I said, I don't know. I'd have to be there under those circumstances.

[bruce drake]

Bret,

I read newsarticles from Houston stating the men where actually heading towards him. Like you I am left dealing with the reports from the media and what the police and the Houston DA have released.

I still think that he did the right thing.

Bruce

[7 MM]

I agree with Bruce!!
A few more concerned citizens is what this country needs.
As a former Texas resident I think the man did the right thing and the dispatcher that humed and hawed should be fired as well

7 MM

[Meatco1]

Personally, I don't care where on the body they were shot, front, back, top, bottom, simply not important to me. They were killed because of their own actions.

They broke into a mans home, stole his property, and were killed in their getaway. They had their opportunity to surrender when confronted, and choose not to.

Their bad decisions cost them life, tough. Perhaps they shouldn’t have started a life of crime after all.

One good thing that can be said about this story, is in this case these particular low life’s will never break into another mans home.

Who knows, your house could have been next their list!

Richard

[leftiye]

It may well be that in the old west 100years ago there was a different tougher breed of crooks due to everyone being armed. I don't know. But I'd bet there were fewer per capita than now where everyone is pre conditioned to be a safe victim by the existing laws. You'd think they (the lawmakers) were trying to make life safer for the criminals and increase crime (not to mention making the erstwhile law abiding into criminals) with the stupid plethora of laws we have to navigate daily.

[wills]

§ 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person
is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if,
under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the
actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force
or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful
interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or
criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection
of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third
person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he
uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent,
or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.002.00.000009.00.htm#9.42.00

[bruce drake]

I am my brother's keeper.

I believe Mr. Horn's actions falls under subparagraphs 1 and 2C. Sounds like an easy day for the Grand Jury then.

Has the District Attorney pushes charges on the fiance yet?

Bruce