Getz not indicted on robbery charge.

[tvc184]

Maybe interesting, maybe not.

Former councilman Mike Getz was accused of Robbery recently. Today the Jefferson County grand jury returned a No Bill in the case meaning no indictment.

As usual (in my opinion) the social media comments seem more political rather than legal. That certainly isn’t shocking.

There are a few points of criminal law and self defense that may be of interest. 

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[thetragichippy]

15 hours ago, tvc184 said:

As usual (in my opinion) the social media comments seem more political rather than legal.

I guess it has been going on for a while, but it seems lately it's everywhere.....People posting their opinion of the law and being completely wrong, yet a large group of people believe it. The Karmelo case, the Nolan case are a couple that come to mind. 

My favorite comment from your link is "I guess we can all go steal yard signs and point guns at people"......lol

[tvc184]

8 hours ago, thetragichippy said:

I guess it has been going on for a while, but it seems lately it's everywhere.....People posting their opinion of the law and being completely wrong, yet a large group of people believe it. The Karmelo case, the Nolan case are a couple that come to mind. 

My favorite comment from your link is "I guess we can all go steal yard signs and point guns at people"......lol

Yeah, the comments are more of the story.

”I heard” and “That’s the law!” are always great for conversation starters.

I like the “It’s Robbery” or similar comments.

 There is that little ol’ bugaboo under Texas law about displaying firearms that seems to be glossed over.  

[thetragichippy]

16 hours ago, tvc184 said:

There is that little ol’ bugaboo under Texas law about displaying firearms that seems to be glossed over.

I've always been taught at a very young age never pull a gun unless you plan on using it. 

I believe the story was Mike was confronted by someone and felt threatened and displayed the gun or may have pointed it at him. Crime? 

If so, my question would be at what point is it legal to pull your firearm?  

[tvc184]

4 hours ago, thetragichippy said:

I've always been taught at a very young age never pull a gun unless you plan on using it. 

I believe the story was Mike was confronted by someone and felt threatened and displayed the gun or may have pointed it at him. Crime? 

If so, my question would be at what point is it legal to pull your firearm?  

In my opinion it is legal in Texas to draw a firearm to let the other person know that you will use it if necessary.

Of course, that kind of flies in the face of the repeated comments I have heard (including some handgun license instructors) that say, if you pull a weapon, then you had better use it or you will go to jail. I believe it depends on the situation.

Texas actually addresses this issue in chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code on self-defense.

 This Section talks about drawing a weapon in order to scare the other person from needing to be dealt with in a more serious manner.

Sec. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE.

The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

Under 9.04 the “threat” of force is justified “when the use of force is justified”. So if a person reasonably believes that he in danger and the use of force or deadly force is justified, so is the threat to use it.

 That seems overwhelmingly logical. If you are justified in taking another person‘s life in self-defense, why would only threatening him be a crime but killing him not? 

 The Texas law then specifically says that if you have the justification to defend yourself, the threat that you will in fact defend yourself, including up to deadly force, is not a crime if the threat was limited to scaring the heck out of the person (creating an apprehension) to make him stop.

 There is always the issue of the threat against you being a reasonable belief. If for example, a person walks up to you in a parking lot and ask for money to buy a sandwich, I believe you would be hard-pressed to make a Jury believe that you were reasonably in fear of your life because a homeless person wanted to eat.

On the other hand if you were in your 70s, and some big guy is charging towards you and saying, I’m about to stomp a mud hole in you, would you be a reasonable fear? A person must take him into Account that deadly force in Texas does not mean death, but can also mean serious bodily injury. Serious bodily injury can be the loss or protracted loss of a bodily organ or member so a broken hand that puts your arm in a cast for four weeks is almost certainly going to be seen at deadly force.

Also note, the Texas law on self defense says that if evidence of self defense is presented to the jury, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was NOT self defense.

So in a case, like this a person says (not sure of the details) that, yes he drew a gun because he reasonably believed that he was in danger of serious bodily injury by a person approaching him angrily after the person was told to stop several times. Would he reasonably believe that he is in danger of being seriously injured and does the DA believe or convince the grand jury beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew that need was not in danger?

Without actually knowing anything other than what is in the media, I would think that he would not be indicted because there is not enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not unreasonable, fear of serious injury.

It is my opinion that many people hear that he drew a gun and automatically say that is a crime. As we can see by the Texas law listed, that is not always true.