TexasCHLforum.com

what did the 911 call say? Rosenthal is such a thug.

I clicked the link and its just spinning...I guess the bandwidth is being sucked dry by all the lawyers of the state trying to get in on it

And is that unedited 911 call or was it magically tweeked for the anti-gun media spin?

ACLU inbound

I personally believe he is in BIIIG trouble

After waiting on the phone for six minutes and the police still had not arrived, I have to say it was reasonable to believe the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means.

I hope he gets a good lawyer, and I hope this encourages people to take some time to think about what they want to say during a 911 call. If you fail to plan, you plan to fail.

Doug.38PR wrote:

Doug.38PR wrote:
Quote:
No, deadly force in response to a theft is retricted to the nighttime. DF to stop a BURGLARY is not so restricted.



Exactly. So Doesn't that alone give the DA legal grounds to go after him?

txinvestigator wrote:
Uhh, I am pretty sure he was stopping a burglary, no?

Well....

§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and

Doug, you're parsing that wrong. Here's how 2.A and 2.B read:
A)...commission of:
- arson;
- burglary; or,
- criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
B)...prevent...immediately after committing:
- burglary;
- robbery;
- aggravated robbery; or,
- theft during the nighttime ;
from escaping with the property

"During the nighttime" only applies to theft and criminal mischief, not to arson, burglary, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

Listen to his recording...the prosecuting attorney is going to have a field day with this poor man!

Odd thing is..up until he started shooting the 911 guy kinda had a "yah right you won't go out there" egging him on attitude..then it immediately turned into a PUT THE GUN DOWN NOW attitude

I had to admire his attitude at the very end. Didn't have a gun, had 911 on the phone, was standing in his open front yard waving his hand...
"Get down on the ground, NOW!"
"No."

LOL

Molon_labe wrote:Listen to his recording...the prosecuting attorney is going to have a field day with this poor man!

Odd thing is..up until he started shooting the 911 guy kinda had a "yah right you won't go out there" egging him on attitude..then it immediately turned into a PUT THE GUN DOWN NOW attitude

Listen to the tape at 2:45 -- the call taker comments to someone else at the call center that the caller is going to shoot the perps if the cops don't get there first. I actually kinda laughed out loud when I heard the remark -- I have no sympathy for thieves.

That said, whether it comes down on his side or not, it just sounds bad.

After all of the discussion here, and listening to the 911 call, I have to say that I still don't see how this case comes close to testing the law. The law is clear that deadly force can be used to stop person fleeing from a burglary if the person reasonably believes that there is no other means to recover the property.

This was a burglary and the man tried to get the police there in time. The police did not show up in time to stop the burglars from leaving, so the man went outside to do so. The burglars did not surrender so he could recover the property, so he shot them.

That seems clear cut to me.

As for the rest, I could see it helping to defend him. He called the police first, and told the dispatcher that he would stop them if the police were unable to get there in time. He even asked for the police to hurry when he did shoot them. The dispatcher was not worried about the burglars either, just if one of his plainclothes officers would get shot by accident.

Still seems clear cut to me. Of course, I can see Chuck trying to get something out of it, but I don't even see it being negligent homicide.

NO-billed or not, I feel very sorry for the guy. To be in a position where you feel forced to take human life is bad...to have to listen to that call over and over in the media must be horrible for him.

I think he needs an award, we need more folks like that in the country.

The interview with the neighbor also stickS in my mind.
"I was in shock because I never heard a gunshot before," Hernandez said. With so many people like here, it leaves no doubt as to why the bad guys expect never to be challenged.

Venus Pax wrote:I can't help but think that much of this may come down to what the homeowner says. Many here assume that the homeowner will come to this man's defense. For his sake, I hope so. However, people will surprise you. They may likely start wailing to the media that no possession of their's was worth these human lives, no matter how bad the character.

Did you notice that he said in the 911 call that he did not know those neighbors whose house was buglarized??

Russell wrote:I'm just upset that they didn't get there fast enough, it seemed that it was almost the very moment he had to take matters into his own hands they got there. Horrible luck for the old man

C'mon now, that is not being fair to the police. The operator told him that there were officers "on scene" at 4mins 44secs into the call. As someone who calls LEO on a regular weekly bases for non-emergency burglary and theft purposes for insurance purposes on my job, that is REAL FAST. I have learned over the years that you don't call to report it unless you don't have anywhere to go, or wait til after lunch (if you want any).
The shooter contradicted the operator and said there was no police present. But how could he know, he said many times that he couldn't see towards the front of the house. The operator said there were plain clothes LEO present in the subdivision, also are uniformed LEO going to be coming sirens blaring or SILENT? What is the response protocol, siren or silent??? They could have been setting up waiting for the burglars to come out, doubt they would enter the building.

hkmp5s wrote:Old chuck the D A is going to go after him Big time. He has been waiting for a test case on our new state gun laws just to show us gun owners who is in charge.

I don't think this is about castle doctrine. This is about Penal Code 9.43.

Molon_labe wrote:Odd thing is..up until he started shooting the 911 guy kinda had a "yah right you won't go out there" egging him on attitude..then it immediately turned into a PUT THE GUN DOWN NOW attitude

I don't think that is a fair statement. The operator is trained to remain calm and try to calm the caller down who is in a desperate situation and needs help. Think of it like this, 911 is your last resort and used when no one else can help, Right? Name a time that you will call 911 when you are not desperate. So the operator was trying to calm a desperate man who was acting, venting and foaming at the mouth like a rabid pitbull that has been chained up and beaten with a whip. He just wanted to sink his teeth into something if you let him go, and the operator has to try to CHANGE his MINDSET.

srothstein wrote:This was a burglary and the man tried to get the police there in time. The police did not show up in time to stop the burglars from leaving, so the man went outside to do so. The burglars did not surrender so he could recover the property, so he shot them.

That seems clear cut to me.

Do we know that? We should see from the police report. Also I thought the police main focus would be to apprehend the burglars. Not just to stop them from leaving. Could they have been setting up and surrounding the place?

srothstein wrote:He called the police first, and told the dispatcher that he would stop them if the police were unable to get there in time

From the recording at 17secs, he said, " Ahhh, I've got a shotgun, do you want me to stop them?" and the dispatcher said, "Nope, don't do that." He just wanted to be the one stopping them and he expressed throughout the entire call.

I hope he will have a good lawyer. The neighbors have expressed their thanks for what he did. Hop they dont stop right there.
Wonder what shottie hemust be having. Seems like he is a good shot .

boomerang wrote:

Russell wrote:- Police have a good chance of recovering the property if the person got a good look at their faces and was a good witness

What percentage of burglaries end up with the property being recovered?

I was the victim of two burlaries when I lived in apartments in Dallas county. When I called the police I was issued a report number for insurance reasons and that was it. No visit by the local PD. Just the report number was all I got. This was around 1990.

hkmp5s wrote:Well I just heard the 911 call and I think he is screwed. Old chuck the D A is going to go after him Big time. He has been waiting for a test case on our new state gun laws just to show us gun owners who is in charge.

He has? I don't think Chuckie is all that crazy about dragging up that old horse again. He got bit pretty hard and embarrassed, I don't believe he wants the voter reminded about what an idiot he had been. Have you noticed he hasn't been very flaboyant to the press for a while? In the mean time I can't see where this incident has much to do with any of the new gun laws.

I think at this point, with the information we've been given, it's impossible to come to any legal conclusions. It very well could be that both criminals came at him in his front yard. Who knows?

Until then, I'm praying for the guy...

Photoman wrote:I think at this point, with the information we've been given, it's impossible to come to any legal conclusions. It very well could be that both criminals came at him in his front yard. Who knows?

Until then, I'm praying for the guy...

There was a few seconds on the 911 tape where he alluded to the BGs advancing toward him.