TexasCHLforum.com

Note to self: If I ever do the right thing in the wrong place.... Beat feet.

KD5NRH wrote:

jmra wrote:Nothing good happens at 2:30 am.

You need a better wife.

At 2:30AM I would be in deep sleep. After a long day, you run out of steam anyways. Sleep is good too.

Dont let this deterriate int inuendo & get it locked w/ some deleted.

Jumping Frog wrote:

KD5NRH wrote:

jmra wrote:Nothing good happens at 2:30 am.

You need a better wife.

Why wait until 2:30 am?

Who said anything about waiting until 2:30? That's just when it reaches stage 3.

IBTL

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

ELB wrote:A lawyer on another forum called the HPD a few days ago asking if they had caught up with the bar patron/hero. They had not, and the lawyer surmised that given how well known the patron apparently is, this might not be a high priority with the HPD right now. With all the other stuff that goes on in Houston, I could go with pushing this down the priority list....

If I were the detective on this case, I think I'd walk to the curb, look both ways down the street, note my inability to see a suspect, then close the case as unsolvable.

Chas.

I have it on good authority that he was a felon, with a firearm, in a bar (51% location). He did the right thing taking them out, but he did it in the wrong way, i.e. completely illegally from several stand points. I really do hope this gets put on the back burner by local LEOs.

RoyGBiv wrote:Note to self: If I ever do the right thing in the wrong place.... Beat feet.

This goes back to a discussion that was had a couple years ago. Let me rehash the situation:

-You're walking down an alley, some guy comes out of nowhere and pulls a knife/gun/other clear indicator of deadly force on you. You draw and drop him.
-Someone in a window, on the corner, or down the block, or something sees what happened and calls 911 informing the police of the shooting *or* There's a payphone nearby, and you call 911 yourself and inform of the shooting, or, in some other way, 911 IS properly called, by some way that doesn't identify YOU. Basically, exactly what happened in this bar situation, but in a place where carrying isn't illegal, and you're not illegally carrying.

Do you:
1) Stay on the scene, wait for the police to arrive
or
2) Beat feet

The reason this is a serious discussion, and both could possibly be considered as valid options, depending on the situation, is because of the following:

If you choose #1 and stay on the scene, you will be subject to the following:

1) Identification - Your name will be known as the person who killed this guy. This will be in the public record for everyone to see/know.
- Is he a member of a gang? Does he have friends/family? Is there any chance of any retaliation against you or your family? His family WILL vilify you in the media. He, of course, was just a kid who was working on turning his life around. You were, of course, a blood-thirsty militant 2A supporter that, appallingly, carries a gun with you everywhere you go IN THE HOPE that you get to kill someone, etc etc.
- Assuming you are no-billed, your name could still be irrevocably harmed in the public eye. This could affect current/future employment, relationships/etc.

2) Defense - Self Defense is a defense to prosecution. Instead of innocent until proven guilty, you basically will be admitting to murder, then trying to prove self-defense. Guilty until proven innocent.
- Even if a clear cut case, still costs money (lawyer) and time. Best case scenario, Grand Jury No-bill. Worst case, Murder Trial.
- Expect be arrested for it. This can have future detrimental effects on background checks/security clearances/etc, even if completely cleared unless it is completely expunged (More Lawyer money and Time), and even then, we all know that expunged things still sometimes show up some places. Were you just arrested for a self defense shooting? Good luck keeping your job if you don't work at a gun store. Companies will want to 'distance' themselves from you no matter what the outcome is, so as to not sully their name or image.
- If it's even marginally questionable circumstances that you cannot 'prove' in the eyes of the media, expect to be treated like George Zimmerman, for the rest of your life. Good luck if it was a black teenager and you're an older caucasian male.
- Then there is always the chance that you will be found guilty.

If you choose #2 and beat feet, none of the above will occur unless they catch you, and can prove it was you that did it.
If they catch you, then you're right where you would be anyways if you just stayed on the scene. Yes there may be additional charges for not staying, but a good lawyer could probably use the above reasoning, in addition to other things to pretty much negate that or knock it down.

As demonstrated in the situation this thread is based off of, if it is clearly a 'good shoot' to the witnesses and on-scene police, and the assailant is a known criminal, it doesn't appear that they'll try very hard.

I'm not advocating for running after a self-defense situation at all , I'm merely bringing up a topic for discussion and input from others.

Well, there is one flaw in your reasoning.

Feeling from the scene can and will be used against you as evidence of your consciousness of guilt. It will destroy your defense at trial.

The justice system will widely view a law-abiding citizen who calls 911 and claims he/she was the victim of a crime who was forced to defend him/herself much differently than a person who murdered and fled the scene.

Jumping Frog wrote:Well, there is one flaw in your reasoning.

Feeling from the scene can and will be used against you as evidence of your consciousness of guilt. It will destroy your defense at trial.

The justice system will widely view a law-abiding citizen who calls 911 and claims he/she was the victim of a crime who was forced to defend him/herself much differently than a person who murdered and fled the scene.

I completely agree that 'fleeing the scene' could make you 'look' more guilty, but I am not sure of legal ramifications of doing so. I know it's a crime to flee a vehicle accident (FSGI/FSRA aka hit and run), but I don't know if any of the same applies for a shooting like that. Eg, there is no 'Law' that requires you to call the police that I know off off-hand. Please correct me if I'm mistaken. I'm going to attempt to find cases of people shooting people and fleeing, and see if there's additional charges other than the murder/manslaughter ones there.

Also, I believe that if it was truly just "evidence of your consciousness of guilt", as you mentioned, that a valid argument could be made at trial that it was not, due to the potential outcomes above. Eg, "I wasn't fleeing because I knew it was a bad shoot, but rather because I don't have the money/time, can't lose my job/don't want to be retaliated upon/thrust in the public eye". That would be for the jury to decide, and would definitely be something to consider.

I also disagree with it destroying your defense at trial. Fleeing the scene would be done AFTER the act of self defense, and would have nothing to do with the cause or actions of the defense itself. Yes, the prosecutor would probably attempt to use it as 'ammo' against you as previously mentioned, but I do not see it affecting the logical facts of the self defense case.


Put it this way, You're on the jury of a self defense case:

-The case is a pretty clear cut case of SD
-Witnesses see the BG pull a knife on the GG, and the GG fires.

The prosecutor comes up with "But he RAN AWAY" afterwards!

2 Questions immediately come to my mind:
1) Did he violate any laws by running away?
2) Did he violate any laws by not calling the police?

In the absence of a law Requiring you to stay there, or confess your guilt to them (5th amendment anyone) via phone, the prosecutor has nothing, in my eyes at least.

Here's an article about a Cabbie that did exactly that. Fled the scene of a self defense shooting:
http://www.crimefilenews.com/2005/12/le ... oting.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The cab driver was 100% acquitted, albeit after a long expensive legal battle.
http://www.crimefilenews.com/2006/10/ac ... ander.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you beat feet, then you risk evidence being tampered with, lost, or tossed. There's a small chance that the guy in Florida, Dunn, was innocent and that the teens tossed their gun(s) after Dunn left. If the teens were armed and he had shot them all, and stayed on scene, then the result MIGHT (not will) be different.

Thugs are very adept at tossing guns, then saying, "I didn't do nothin". They literally do that for a living.

If you do beat feet, be sure to;
1. scan the area for cams and walk away instead of drive away to make it more difficult to identify you. The detectives, if lazy, will think you just walked there so that's why you walked away from the scene. Pray that the cams didn't catch your face somehow. When going to a high risk location such as a bar in the bad part of town (best not to go), it might be wise to park somewhere in a cam's blind spot or park across the street and then hoof it so as to avoid them catching your license plate on video.

2. take pictures of the crime scene to avoid tampering after you leave. Last year, a woman who shot a man armed with a knife did exactly that and then beat feet. She took a photo of the crime scene with her phone before leaving. They caught her a couple days later (gas station video showed her license plate) but because she had the photo of the guy with a knife, she was no billed by the grand jury. She's from the hood so she knew their games. That's why she took the photo. Be street smart like her. The worker at the gas station knew the guy so he might've hid the knife to protect the dying guy from the po po. Maybe he didn't do so because he saw her take the photo.

dicion wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:Note to self: If I ever do the right thing in the wrong place.... Beat feet.

This goes back to a discussion that was had a couple years ago. Let me rehash the situation:

-You're walking down an alley, some guy comes out of nowhere and pulls a knife/gun/other clear indicator of deadly force on you. You draw and drop him.
-Someone in a window, on the corner, or down the block, or something sees what happened and calls 911 informing the police of the shooting *or* There's a payphone nearby, and you call 911 yourself and inform of the shooting, or, in some other way, 911 IS properly called, by some way that doesn't identify YOU. Basically, exactly what happened in this bar situation, but in a place where carrying isn't illegal, and you're not illegally carrying.

Do you:
1) Stay on the scene, wait for the police to arrive
or
2) Beat feet

The reason this is a serious discussion, and both could possibly be considered as valid options, depending on the situation, is because of the following:

If you choose #1 and stay on the scene, you will be subject to the following:

1) Identification - Your name will be known as the person who killed this guy. This will be in the public record for everyone to see/know.
- Is he a member of a gang? Does he have friends/family? Is there any chance of any retaliation against you or your family? His family WILL vilify you in the media. He, of course, was just a kid who was working on turning his life around. You were, of course, a blood-thirsty militant 2A supporter that, appallingly, carries a gun with you everywhere you go IN THE HOPE that you get to kill someone, etc etc.
- Assuming you are no-billed, your name could still be irrevocably harmed in the public eye. This could affect current/future employment, relationships/etc.

2) Defense - Self Defense is a defense to prosecution. Instead of innocent until proven guilty, you basically will be admitting to murder, then trying to prove self-defense. Guilty until proven innocent.
- Even if a clear cut case, still costs money (lawyer) and time. Best case scenario, Grand Jury No-bill. Worst case, Murder Trial.
- Expect be arrested for it. This can have future detrimental effects on background checks/security clearances/etc, even if completely cleared unless it is completely expunged (More Lawyer money and Time), and even then, we all know that expunged things still sometimes show up some places. Were you just arrested for a self defense shooting? Good luck keeping your job if you don't work at a gun store. Companies will want to 'distance' themselves from you no matter what the outcome is, so as to not sully their name or image.
- If it's even marginally questionable circumstances that you cannot 'prove' in the eyes of the media, expect to be treated like George Zimmerman, for the rest of your life. Good luck if it was a black teenager and you're an older caucasian male.
- Then there is always the chance that you will be found guilty.

If you choose #2 and beat feet, none of the above will occur unless they catch you, and can prove it was you that did it.
If they catch you, then you're right where you would be anyways if you just stayed on the scene. Yes there may be additional charges for not staying, but a good lawyer could probably use the above reasoning, in addition to other things to pretty much negate that or knock it down.

As demonstrated in the situation this thread is based off of, if it is clearly a 'good shoot' to the witnesses and on-scene police, and the assailant is a known criminal, it doesn't appear that they'll try very hard.

I'm not advocating for running after a self-defense situation at all , I'm merely bringing up a topic for discussion and input from others.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

ELB wrote:A lawyer on another forum called the HPD a few days ago asking if they had caught up with the bar patron/hero. They had not, and the lawyer surmised that given how well known the patron apparently is, this might not be a high priority with the HPD right now. With all the other stuff that goes on in Houston, I could go with pushing this down the priority list....

If I were the detective on this case, I think I'd walk to the curb, look both ways down the street, note my inability to see a suspect, then close the case as unsolvable.

Chas.

While it's great that the hero in this story may get off scot-free, it's sad to think that if he wasn't in a situation where he needed to use his firearm in a bar, but yet got caught carrying in a bar, that he would be facing felony charges. I think it's a double standard. You aren't allowed to carry in bars, that's a trip to the slammer and loss of your 2nd Amendment rights for life. But, if you DO happen to be carrying in a bar and manage to save someone's life as a result... well, we'll just look the other way. No harm, no foul, right?

I really hope the 51% law gets fixed this upcoming legislative session, and that this instance be used as a defense for repealing it. Texas Constitution, Article 1, Section 23 reads: "Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime." But what about regulation that doesn't prevent crime? In fact, the 51% law seems like it encourages crime! No doubt being prohibited from being intoxicated while carrying should stay, but there's plenty of times where I go to 51% establishments and don't drink an ounce.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but it just irks me.