http://m.click2houston.com/news/man-sho ... l/33832460" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
BMW driver shoots and kills Porsche driver in Galleria area.
Shooter claims self defense.
No mention of CHL, no mention of dead man having a weapon.
Dead driver did leave his car.
This one will probably not turn out well for shooter.
Road Rage Shooting in Houston (new)
-
Oldgringo
- Senior Member
- Posts: 11203
- Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 10:15 pm
- Location: Pineywoods of east Texas
Re: Road Rage Shooting in Houston (new)
"Ach du lieber"!
-
Charles L. Cotton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17788
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
Re: Road Rage Shooting in Houston (new)
I saw two TV news report on this shooting. Each time the reported stated that the dead man got out of his car and started punching the shooter. A "friend" in the dead man's car said he got out of his car because the shooter allegedly said "go back to Islam." The shooter has been charged with assault with a deadly weapon, but the charges may be upgraded to murder.
If the facts as reported are accurate, it reminds me of the first shooting by a CHL in 1996, only a few months after CHL came into effect. Dallas PD, Dallas DA and Dallas media tried hard to get the CHL convicted of murder. They claimed that, as predicted, a fender-bender turned into a shooting. It was a lie. The CHL was beaten almost unconscious before he grabbed his Glock 23 and ended the deadly assault.
I'm not saying the shooter in this case was being beaten as badly, if at all, but if there is evidence he was being attacked, then he may be fine. I will be very interested to see if verbal provocation is sufficient under Tex. Penal Code §9.31(a)(2) to deprive him of the right of self-defense. (Yes, I said "right" as opposed to "justification" because of the Heller decision.) It should not be sufficient since §9.31(b)(1) makes it clear that verbal provocation alone is not sufficient to justify the use of force. If it is insufficient to justify the use force, then it should be insufficient to deny the right to defend oneself.
Chas.
If the facts as reported are accurate, it reminds me of the first shooting by a CHL in 1996, only a few months after CHL came into effect. Dallas PD, Dallas DA and Dallas media tried hard to get the CHL convicted of murder. They claimed that, as predicted, a fender-bender turned into a shooting. It was a lie. The CHL was beaten almost unconscious before he grabbed his Glock 23 and ended the deadly assault.
I'm not saying the shooter in this case was being beaten as badly, if at all, but if there is evidence he was being attacked, then he may be fine. I will be very interested to see if verbal provocation is sufficient under Tex. Penal Code §9.31(a)(2) to deprive him of the right of self-defense. (Yes, I said "right" as opposed to "justification" because of the Heller decision.) It should not be sufficient since §9.31(b)(1) makes it clear that verbal provocation alone is not sufficient to justify the use of force. If it is insufficient to justify the use force, then it should be insufficient to deny the right to defend oneself.
Chas.
