TexasCHLforum.com

I must be seeing an edited version of the video. Where are you folks seeing that much detail?

I didn't see a bat, Howard raising any object, or him throwing a bat. (I did hear what sounded to be a baseball bat hitting the ground after the first shot was fired.) The camera was not pointed at the father when he fired the first shot. However, the police dept. statement said the father fired when Howard raised a bat while standing seven feet away. The camera swung toward the father after the first shot and I got a glimpse of his head dodging an incoming object, before he fired again.

Some have said that Howard was unarmed after he threw the bat at the father. That's an assumption that may or may not be correct, because Howard is not on camera at this point. Also, as many have correctly noted in other threads, unarmed does not mean harmless. The huge disparity of size and apparent physical ability between Howard and the father is a major factor in a self-defense case. Throughout the entire interaction, Howard was threatening to kill both the father and the son. He obtained a bat from someone on the scene, then raised it as if to strike when he was very close to the father. This is by no means a slam-dunk for the prosecution. (I've already posted on the provocation issue, so I won't repeat it here.)

So much for the legal side; let's look at the aftermath. I don't think that the father or son shot Howard over a mattress or a dumpster. I think both shot because each felt the father was in grave danger. Regardless of the motivation, a man is dead and two men are in jail awaiting trial on murder charges. Even if the police and DA had agreed that the shooting was justified self-defense, both father and son will have to live with the knowledge that they voluntarily remained in a confrontation with an enraged man that was likely to lead to bloodshed.

After going over the use of force in my LTC classes, I then talk about the non-legal, real-world aftermath of a self-defense shooting. How one handles the emotional impact of such an event depends not only on their personality, but also on the fact-pattern underlying the shooting. It's one thing to take a life when you were thrust into a situation where you had no choice. It's quite another thing to try to sleep knowing that, although legally justified in shooting, you could have simply walked away.

When a grand jury and trial jury watch this video, I don't think they are going to like anyone involved. There are no heroes in this story.

Chas.

PriestTheRunnepost_id=1222536 wrote:Mon Sep 24, 2018 10:22 am I don't see how they aren't found guilty since there seem to be several factors where they lose protections (IE public space?, engaging in the confrontation, threatening language, etc...) IANAL though, and the law can be odd.

As I said in another post, I don't know how this is going to play out. We don't know what happened before the video began and that can be critical. However, the factors you listed do not necessarily spell a loss for the defendants. Read TPC §§9.04, 9.31, 9.32 and 9.33 again. While provocation can cost one the ability to legally use deadly force, that provocation must be the factor that started the problem between the parties. Again, without seeing the events from the beginning, we don't know who started the trouble.

The death threats were primarily coming from the dead man. While the father and son also threatened to kill the man who was killed, their threats seem to have been more in the nature of warnings that would be justified under TPC §9.04.

I don't know if they can afford a good attorney, but if they can, this will be a very interesting case to follow.

No one should interpret this post to be supporting the actions by the defendants. Their problem is one they likely could have avoided, at least for the moment.

Chas.

troglodyte wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 8:38 pm

Charles L. Cotton wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 2:55 pm The testosterone and stupidity were flowing like wine! This will be an interesting case to follow. I can't see the detail some of you folks are describing. I can't see what the dead man did to prompt the father or son to shoot.

As with most videos, it didn't start at the beginning, so we don't know who did what in terms of the initial provocation. Remember, both the ability to defend oneself, as well as the lack of a duty to retreat, can be lost if one provokes the other person. Remember also that the provocation must be what started the trouble between the parties. As one Member noted, the dead man was a huge guy. This is a factor. The people are neighbors so a history of known violence could also be a factor.

I found a version of the video on YouTube that has all of the cursing bleeped out, so I'm going to use it in my LTC classes. It's a great example of letting pride and Adrenalin get you killed or charged with some form of homicide. One man is dead and two are in jail over a mattress.

Chas.

Charles, would you be willing to share the link of the cleaned up video. I’d like to show it in my classes also.

Here it is.

Chas.

The testosterone and stupidity were flowing like wine! This will be an interesting case to follow. I can't see the detail some of you folks are describing. I can't see what the dead man did to prompt the father or son to shoot.

As with most videos, it didn't start at the beginning, so we don't know who did what in terms of the initial provocation. Remember, both the ability to defend oneself, as well as the lack of a duty to retreat, can be lost if one provokes the other person. Remember also that the provocation must be what started the trouble between the parties. As one Member noted, the dead man was a huge guy. This is a factor. The people are neighbors so a history of known violence could also be a factor.

I found a version of the video on YouTube that has all of the cursing bleeped out, so I'm going to use it in my LTC classes. It's a great example of letting pride and Adrenalin get you killed or charged with some form of homicide. One man is dead and two are in jail over a mattress.

Chas.