tvc184

That pretty much sums up the entire case.

I have yet to see any reasonable explanation from anybody as to why misreading an address allows a person to threaten you with a firearm. As LR posted the article of a mistaken address and some guy thought that was justification to come out shooting. Where are y’all coming up with these nonsensical theories? This is not difficult. Tragic, yes, but not difficult. The police were called to a family disturbance. They walked across the street to the wrong house. They knocked on the door and announced police. Somebody inside the house heard the knocking and the man walked out without knowing anything, except that was a knock and immediately pointed gun at whoever was standing on his property. The (1) officers were not violating any law, (2) they had the same authority on stand your ground and (3) they had a reasonable belief that their lives were in danger. Can anyone point to where any of that is incorrect?

How do you retreat when a gun is brought up and pointing at you from 15 feet away? You are not going to outrun a bullet to confirm. I am not sure what is to be confirmed anyway. The police don’t usually put themselves in that situation. They are called by someone to be there. Under what legal situation should a person be able to point a gun at someone for knocking on a door? The claim of fear is nonsense. If fear was justification then a person could kill anyone and say the person scared me. “I heard a person walking on my porch and I was scared”. The law says a “reasonable belief” and reasonable will be judged by a jury. I don’t think that almost anyone would feel that a person turning around in your driveway or hearing a knock on your door gives a reasonable belief that you are about to be killed and need to resort to the use of or threat of deadly force. I suspect that if you changed the original story to a neighbor and not the police, people would have a different opinion.

Are you sure? After all it was 10 o’clock at night! Surely that gives people the authority to come out pointing guns or shooting and claim to be scared. Now beyond sarcasm…. Yes it is almost exactly the same except trade a person in a car for a person out of the car. All uses of force use the term “reasonable”. “I saw a car in my driveway” would not be seen as a reasonable justification for deadly force by any reasonable person.

The castle doctrine is a general legal concept and has no bearing in law. There is no mention in Texas law on castle doctrine. There is statutory law that says exactly what is illegal and in some (rare) cases, what is legal. The idea of the castle doctrine goes back to the early 1600s with Sir Edward Coke and late described in more details by William Pitt who said that a man may have a crappy home by the king may not enter. So the concept of castle doctrine from English common law is that the government cannot enter your home without being invited or a warrant. Somehow that has been expanded into the belief that there is an actual law that says castle doctrine and it covers you everywhere you walk. Walking on a public sidewalk is not your home. Your car is not your home unless it is like a motor home. In this particular incident, the police were not inside his home. Statutory or written/enacted law is what matters.

No, a straw man is a false accusation that is easy to tear down. Facts are not a straw man. Emotions usually are. What you call stand your ground law has nothing to do with property. In fact, in this situation, the police have the same right of stand your ground. Being on your own property gives a person no authority to point guns at people, make threats, etc. Perhaps you should read the penal code.

Can a person be charged with any traffic offenses while on private property? Examples are the Walmart parking lot or the same at a mall. I am not referring to a private driveway.

Yeah, the homeowner was charged. I am not sure where there may be a misunderstanding but being on your own property gives no additional right to assault or threaten someone. There is obviously a right of self defense on your property but the situation must fit a self defense scenario. Merely being on a person’s property is not grounds for self defense. The situation you posted is almost identical to the title of this thread. The homeowner, without apparent justification, pulled a weapon when not justified. “He was on my property” is not a valid reason for pointing or using a firearm. Coincidentally it appears to have happened for someone at the wrong address. But, neither investigation is completed. I can understand releasing the suspect. When an arrest is made the DA has a limited time to accept the accusation charges from the police arrest. I think in Texas it is a usually 72 hour time limit. The police have to file enough information to the DA for the case to detain the person who has not made bail. For a felony there still has to be an indictment later. The investigation is not over, but the police did what we call, busted the deadline. Basically during an arraignment, the judge gives the DA a time limit to have enough information to make it appear that the case will go forward later. If that information is not in, the person must be released by law. The person would be released only to be arreste later on a warrant, when and if enough information is gathered.

By state law (a city might have an ordinance for example, prohibiting a U-turn in a business district) unless prohibited by a sign, a U-turn is legal in Texas except…… Where you can’t see oncoming traffic for at least 500 feet on a curve or grade. So if a person does a U-turn on an overpass or a fairly sharp curve in the road, it might be a violation. Sec. 545.102. TURNING ON CURVE OR CREST OF GRADE. An operator may not turn the vehicle to move in the opposite direction when approaching a curve or the crest of a grade if the vehicle is not visible to the operator of another vehicle approaching from either direction within 500 feet

That is half correct. There is another restriction other than a sign. As a supervisor, on a couple of occasions I got a citizen complaining because an officer did a U-turn. Uhhhh….. they aren’t illegal.

Are U-turns legal in Texas? Y N If so, where?

The “event” was a guy who was wearing a gun and said the laws don’t apply to me. He reached for the gun as officers tried to take him out of the car after talking to him for a few minutes. He apparently got the gun out because the holster he was wearing was empty and the gun was in the driver’s side floorboard.

If “terrified”, why go outside? ”Aggressor” definition: Knocking on a door.

You are talking emotions. I am talking law. I guess you are saying that if you were knocking on another guy’s door and he came out and threatened you with a gun with no justification and you used self defense? If the self-defense was lawful, which it likely would be in your scenario, whose property has no bearing. You can’t legally threaten to kill someone because they’re on your property. Deadly force is unlawful to use to terminate trespassing. If you shoot and kill a person for trespassing in Texas, you will likely go to jail for murder. Again, I can only go by Texas law. Pointing a gun at someone, even without a threat, is a crime unless there is a legal justification for self defense. Pointing a gun and making a threat is Aggravated Assault. So what justification do you think a homeowner has that when he hears someone knocking, he can step out and point a gun at the person? By the way, the police don’t get to side with anyone or file charges. The district attorney does that. The police chief should do what he did. He gave condolences to the family. I guess under your rationale, if UPS knocked on your door late night, you would be justified in threatening to kill him by pointing a gun while in a shooting stance. I would say you may need a good lawyer on retainer.

The fired first is a ridiculous premise. I guess if a robber pulls a knife on you and demands money, you can’t shoot until he tries to stab you? The police have just as much right for self defense as anyone else. Whose property it is on has no bearing. Did you ignore the video of the guy in a two handed shooting stance pointing at the officers… and for no legal reason whatsoever? What, a person knocked? Nothing in any comment that I have made has suggested that there be no apology. I clearly said that an apology has nothing to do with the law.

Certainly. For whatever reason, the homeowner chose to point a gun a someone without any justification. We will never know what he thought. Intoxicated? Kids knocking on his door at night and he wanted to scare them? Who knows but it appears that he made a poor and probably criminal decision.

This is a body cam from a different officer with the chief narrating the slow motion video in a press conference. It appears that the homeowner shoved the door open with one hand and then both hands come together in a two handed firing position and pointed it at officers. If you want to see the explanation and video it starts at about the 3 minute mark. All 3 police body cams are not shown but the chief said on one camera an officer said that he heard a gun rack and officers started backing away. The man then stepped out and brought the gun up into a firing position.

Grieving and apologies have nothing to do with the law. No matter what happened or happens in the future. takes away from the tragedy. It appears that the innocent man pointed a handgun at officers. His wife then came out and appears to have fired shots at officers. You can’t retreat by backing up faster than a bullet. I would not be shocked with criminal charges but I would also but not be shocked with no charges filed.

I can’t imagine being prosecuted for knocking on the wrong door. Remember that the officers were lawfully at the same location.

Fire someone for a typo? What if the caller gave the wrong address? What if he said “next door to” which is common? Why does it matter why the police knocked on a guy’s door? It kind of adds an interesting take when people complain about no knock warrants. With a warrant, giving legal authority to force entry, people say knock and let them know who you are. That will stop any accidents from happening. In this case the police knocked, announced that it was the police. After waiting, they knocked again. Who knows what will happen in NM under their law but I questioned the wisdom of someone knocking on my door and me opening the door with a gun in my hand. On me? Hidden but peaking out instead of simply opening the door? Maybe but not what this guy appears to have done.

I am saying that the GPS doesn’t show the exact house or location in the map program. GPS can ping the nearest tower from a cell phone which is probably 98% of calls. I have seen many times a person call 911 but can’t give an exact location and the tower might show the call coming from about a five square block area. The officers didn’t kick a door, they knocked. If someone knocks on your door, do you open the door without looking outside with a gun in hand? What if the officer was just on patrol and saw an interior light on inside the homeowner’s car and wanted to have the person come out and see if the car had been broken into. I have done that on several occasions. I would hate to think if the homeowner opened the door with a pistol in his hand pointing toward me.

Houses aren’t identified on GPS while responding to calls. A single digit typo by a dispatcher will completely change the location.

A horrible deal but… The police are sent on an always dangerous domestic dispute call. The officers knock on the door and announce themselves as the police. Getting no response, they repeat the process. Again with no response, they ask the dispatcher to confirm the address and also to call the homeowner and have one step outside. The homeowner finally opens the door with a gun in hand and is shot and killed by the police, They were at the wrong address. How many of the people reading this forum, hear a knock on the door and throw the door open with gun in hand? [Hidden Content]

This short video on YouTube came out a few days ago. These two defense attorneys discuss a case of a man who has an Apple Airtag in his truck which was later stolen. He was able to track down the stolen truck and tried to recover it himself, and ended up killing the thief. He is claiming self defense, not the recovery of property. In the video though, one of the defense attorneys mentions the Texas “shoot a man in the back for your wallet law”. Then they go on to mention it has to be fresh like an in progress crime and not track the person down later (which isn’t the claim of the guy recovering his truck). I just thought it was interesting that we discussed it and now this video from two Texas defense attorneys who I believe specialize in self defense claims, mention the deadly force to protect property law including fleeing with the property. But like before, I don’t feel like having to defend my actions in court even if lawful. [Hidden Content]

Any time you make the police the enemy and reduce policing, particularly in neighborhoods, the results will not be good. Major cities do exactly that.