M14 Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Civilian Non-Combatant
Joined
·
1,338 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Wisconsin laws allowed Rittenhouse to openly carry a long arm in public and use it to defend himself from attempts to kill or injure him. There was testimony about whether or not he was there to defend someone else's property, a car lot.

So, in the same or similar circumstances, what laws apply here in Texas? I have lived here since 1977 and there have been a number of self-defense cases that stick in my mind. In one, a homeowner shot a door-bell prankster. The deceased was a drunk tourist from Ireland. Only when public outcry in Ireland made the case an international State Department incident did it c go to a grand jury . . .who did not indite. Public outcry in Ireland forced a second Grand Jury hearing with the same result.

In another case, a man saw burglars climb into a neighbor's house through a window. He cslled 911, but the response was going to be long for some reason. When the burglers finally did exit the house, police had not arrived. The man attempted to hold them at gunpoint till the police arrived. The two men tried to rush him and he killed them both with his shotgun. Again, no trial.

But times have changed. What is the legal situation here in Texas today? In a similar situation to the Kenosha riots, would Rittenhouse even be prosecuted for anything?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,371 Posts
WI v Rittenhouse was politically inflated, so it would depend on the exact scenario, persons involved and social climate in a TX version. I found it disturbing Rittenhouse was charged as an adult in comparison to so many other cases (some more clearly intentional acts) where a teen is not treated as a legal adult, and this case was much more grey than those. Regardless of the TX laws, you can only imagine how many different ways the same situation could play out if any of the 3 Kenosha attackers was a person of color? or if Rittenhouse was a LEO? or if the local Police had been cracking down hard on all looters? or if the videos did not exist?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I live in a Houston suburb, both of which are in Harris County. The DA here is a liberal activist type and much like other Blue cities, she just refuses to prosecute violent repeat offenders. They are released with virtually no bond and more often than not, are never charged.

But given her track record and political persuasion I would fully expect her office to charge and prosecute someone exercising self-defense as described. Unless you are in your home during the event you're likely to be forced into bankruptcy legally defending yourself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Read chapter 9 of the Texas Penal code. My interpretation is that he would probably be legally justified by state law. But there’s really no telling if he were in Houston, Austin, San Antonio or Dallas/ Fort Worth. Chapter 9 is a good read for any Texan and covers all Deadly Force justifications. Sec 9.42 covers a person’s right to defend his/her own property and has expanded protections.

Also being 17 years old in Texas makes you an adult as far as criminal law goes. Under 17 and a court could certify you as an adult depending on the crime.

“Sec. 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.”


Here’s a link to Chapter 9:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,992 Posts
The key thing about the Rittenhouse case is that it was just politically driven, under the law they should never have convened the court.

Rittenhouse actually worked there, his father, grandparents, and other relatives lived there, he actually did volunteer service there, in short, it was his home. His parents are divorced and his mother, who had legal custody of him, lived in a house that was 20 minutes away, across a state line but his whole life was actually in that city. He was helping friends protect their property and in the end he was protecting his own life against several felons with long records who said that they intended to kill him while chasing him down the street. What if Kyle had been a young blak man with a crowd of crazy white guys chasing him down the street, screaming that they were going to kill him? I'll bet everybody would have burned the city down for taking the black man to court.

The Law is supposed to be blind, we are all supposed to be treated equally, but I honestly don't believe that is what happened. Thank goodness that the jury was made up of people that had integrity and the courage of their beliefs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
It would depend on which liberal garbage dumpster of a city you lived in. I live out in the country near a small northeast Texas town. He could of probably done a mag dump and got away with it here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
The surest way to end up behind the eight ball of life is to, particularly if you are a lay person, attempt to predict "what is legal" in the sort of context you present.

Sure, read the Texas Penal Code. Then, of course, caselaw for similar situations -- what did the Texas Court of Criminal Appels decide when a similar case was convicted in the past and appealed. Of course there is what the DA will present to a grand jury. Then the LE officers whose case it is may have a particular like or dislike. Then there are the manifold unknowns, including what the current events (political) climate is like, or becomes like.

Think for a moment how long it took to prosecute the Arbury case. I do not think that was "corruption." I think it was business as usual. Young Mr. Arbury was on probation. He obviously was casing the house under construction, there were ample videos. I think he was a thug out on the prowl, no respect for private property, no fear of all the laws of God and man. The father and son defendants absolutely figured they were in the right. Indeed they may have been. The DA didn't present the case, he/she agreed. And yet, ultimately, they were prosecuted. How will that turn out for them? I'm thinking they wish they had been a little less sure of what the law allows. One man's opinion.

Everybody has got an opinion on "the law." "But it says right here . . ." famous last words. Bar exams are not about black letter law. They are about issue identification, "thinking like a lawyer," analytical thinking. Every case is different. Predicting what will be prosecuted and how it will turn out at trial is like predicting the shape of an electron's orbit in some given molecule -- takes specialized knowledge, experience, and lots of times you end up wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,481 Posts
[QUOTE="ManxumFoe, post: 4659321, memb
So, in the same or similar circumstances, what laws apply here in Texas? I have lived here since 1977 and there have been a number of self-defense cases that stick in my mind. In one, a homeowner shot a door-bell prankster. The deceased was a drunk tourist from Ireland. Only when public outcry in Ireland made the case an international State Department incident did it c go to a grand jury . . .who did not indite. Public outcry in Ireland forced a second Grand Jury hearing with the same result.

The homeowner is a friend of mine Jeff Agee we are both in an a few
antique & classic MC clubs
At about 2/3 AM two men started knocking at Jeffs front door. Hiding when he came to the door . Jeffs wife called police
After a few minutes both Men jumped the back fence. Jeff saw them from a side window, the 2 then started kicking and beating on the french doors Jeff fired 3 rds from a 380. through the window dropping 1 as the other ran away
As stated no charges were filed both times
However Jeff had to defend his actions in a civil suit bought by the dead mans relatives
which BTW he won . except for having to endure all that time wasted , worrie ,.happy horse manure , hassle. & publicity if you call that winning .

🔫 🔫🔫 💰💰💰 💲💲💲
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top