TexasCHLforum.com

philip964 wrote:https://www.click2houston.com/news/hous ... g-fbi-raid

Ok, I owe the FBI agent an apology.

Victim grabbed the barrel of the agents rifle and started pulling. Agent thought he was going to loose control of his weapon and fired.

I did get it right that it was a rifle.

Well, this fact sure puts a whole other perspective on what happened. Dark room, no visibility, you expect the bad guy to put up a fight, and someone grabs your rifle. You don't expect a bound victim to be fighting. What would you do? I read someplace that the FBI specifically decided to breach without any lights. I suspect that the FBI tactics manual is going to get a rewrite.

philip964 wrote:https://www.click2houston.com/news/hous ... g-fbi-raid

Ok, I owe the FBI agent an apology.

Victim grabbed the barrel of the agents rifle and started pulling. Agent thought he was going to loose control of his weapon and fired.

I did get it right that it was a rifle.

The FBI isn't exactly the epitome of truthfulness these days, much less fidelity, bravery and integrity. Sounds like a good cover story though. Nice they trotted out such an esteemed law enforcement representative as Art Acevedo to spin the story on their behalf.

Perhaps the FBI couldn't find one of their own agents who could explain this to the press and keep a straight face, They needed a professional liar to tell the tail.
I suppose it can take a couple of days to make sure the witnesses all come up with the same story. It might be a little more believable if they were more forthcoming. Even if it happened this way it shows some incompetence. Dropping the tool, not identifying himself, using the barrel of a gun as a break-in tool.

Unfortunately, the FBI has very little credibility anymore. So I'm not inclined to believe their version of events any more than I am going to believe a suspect who just happened to find some stolen property and put it in the trunk of his car so he could drive to the police station and turn it in.

It's possible that the FBI is telling the truth here. But I'm not going to assume that they are without more proof. An independent ballistics test might be helpful.

Didn't the FBI first say the shooting was accidental, as in AD, not "I accidentally shot the wrong guy?"

Chas.

I am also curious how the victim was bound or tied up that he could grab the gun and make the agent believe he was about to lose it. He loses his "tool" to break the window then sticks his rifle in the window far enough for someone to grab it.

Also, no lights? Entering a dark room by breaking the window and he didn't have weapon lights or other lights illuminating the room?

I don't know either the facts of the interaction or whose version of events is nearest the truth. Having said that, if the shooter's finger was already on the trigger when the shootee pulled on the gun by the barrel, it might make sense that an accidental (negligent) shooting was reported.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:Unfortunately, the FBI has very little credibility anymore. So I'm not inclined to believe their version of events any more than I am going to believe a suspect who just happened to find some stolen property and put it in the trunk of his car so he could drive to the police station and turn it in.

It's possible that the FBI is telling the truth here. But I'm not going to assume that they are without more proof. An independent ballistics test might be helpful.

MechAg94 wrote:I am also curious how the victim was bound or tied up that he could grab the gun and make the agent believe he was about to lose it. He loses his "tool" to break the window then sticks his rifle in the window far enough for someone to grab it.

Also, no lights? Entering a dark room by breaking the window and he didn't have weapon lights or other lights illuminating the room?

They may not have shot the victim on purpose but the rifle grabbing story sounds like an awful fake excuse. Maybe this version is made up by the liberal press.

bmwrdr wrote:

MechAg94 wrote:I am also curious how the victim was bound or tied up that he could grab the gun and make the agent believe he was about to lose it. He loses his "tool" to break the window then sticks his rifle in the window far enough for someone to grab it.

Also, no lights? Entering a dark room by breaking the window and he didn't have weapon lights or other lights illuminating the room?

They may not have shot the victim on purpose but the rifle grabbing story sounds like an awful fake excuse. Maybe this version is made up by the liberal press.

Well, the only scenario I can imagine is the guy was bound with hands in front and thought the people coming through the window was someone coming to hurt him. That seems a bit of a stretch. We are hearing about this 2nd or 3rd hand so I don't know. That is partly why I was curious about lights. Once they break the window, stealth is meaningless.

There has to be more to this story. My instincts are telling me that this is not your typical "innocent victim".

Maybe a bad dude who got kidnapped by other bad dudes because he was a bad dude. Maybe he resisted the LEO because he didn't know whether they were coming to rescue him or arrest him.

Was there body-cam or other video of the incident? If so, what does it show, if anything? If it exists will law enforcement release it? Many questions to be answered here.

philip964 wrote:https://www.click2houston.com/news/hous ... g-fbi-raid

Ok, I owe the FBI agent an apology.

Victim grabbed the barrel of the agents rifle and started pulling. Agent thought he was going to loose control of his weapon and fired.

I did get it right that it was a rifle.

Your apology may be premature. First question I have is why is the HPD Police Chief acting as a spokesman fro the FBI. Second question or comment actually "no lights?' really. Thirdly someone???? grabbed his rifle barrel so he discharged his weapon w/o knowing who it was? I can't imagine he couldn't jerk the rifle away. I'm thinking finger on trigger the whole time. Fourth if the victim was grabbing the barrel how did he get shot in the upper part of an extremity (arm I assume) and torso? Nothing about this shooting makes sense to me at this point.

allisji wrote:There has to be more to this story. My instincts are telling me that this is not your typical "innocent victim".

Maybe a bad dude who got kidnapped by other bad dudes because he was a bad dude. Maybe he resisted the LEO because he didn't know whether they were coming to rescue him or arrest him.

I believe in the first reports the kidnappers were looking for the victim's brother not him. There may be more to the story but I'm not ready to throw down the victim until there's more information.

Breaks one of the fundamental safety rules - Know your target and what's behind it.

Probably broke another too - keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot.

That of course assumes that this explanation has any relationship to the truth.