User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 1:54:06 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No shit. I agree with you 100%. But hey, anything is possible in this clown world we inhabit now. Besides, if his attorney is anything like our old Barty Boy here, I'm pretty sure he's fooked. This is literally THE real-time "Get Off My Lawn" scenario that every Arfcommer has mentally masterbated to since the release of Gran Torino. Now they want to crucify Kyle. Chad is dead. Long live Kyle. You think Arfcommers mentally masterbate to the idea of shooting someone who has a court ordered and legitimization reason to be at their house. Seek therapy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 1:54:57 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:  He's reaching for the mag and appears to make contact with it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I don't see that at all in your gif. I see him push up with the top of his wrist/arm? He's reaching for the mag and appears to make contact with it. There is that whole fingers & opposable thumb thing humans use to grab with. His PALM is downward facing the entire time. He raised his forearm (while keeping his palm DOWN at all times) to move rifle muzzle away from him. Since his wrist never twisted or rolled to put the palm UPward to "Grab" anything, please explain how he "Grabbed" the rifle with the top of his hand? Maybe Velcro or Duct Tape or a he sprayed a bunch of "Stick'um" or what ... ... ... ? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 1:58:37 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is that whole fingers & opposable thumb thing humans use to grab with. His PALM is downward facing the entire time. He raised his forearm (while keeping his palm DOWN at all times) to move rifle muzzle away from him. Since his wrist never twisted or rolled to put the palm UPward to "Grab" anything, please explain how he "Grabbed" the rifle with the top of his palm. Maybe Velcro or Duct Tape or a he sprayed a bunch of "Stick'um" or what ... ... ... ? You don’t grab things with the top of your forearm instead of your fingers and hands? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 1:58:55 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In the mean time you dont leave your spouse to be yelled and threatened at. She was not his spouse, she was just the whore he was fucking that fooled him into killing her ex husband! Dumb bastard is going to be fucked for life. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 1:59:43 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is that whole fingers & opposable thumb thing humans use to grab with. His PALM is downward facing the entire time. He raised his forearm (while keeping his palm DOWN at all times) to move rifle muzzle away from him. Since his wrist never twisted or rolled to put the palm UPward to "Grab" anything, please explain how he "Grabbed" the rifle with the top of his palm. Maybe Velcro or Duct Tape or a he sprayed a bunch of "Stick'um" or what ... ... ... ? /devils advocate 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:01:56 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So how many have you seen that do NOT involve a parent, versus those that do? I can't remember a single one that didn't. Last one in AL, not a custody issue. https://www.wvtm13.com/article/amber-alert-issued-alabama-15-year-old-girl-adrianna-griffin/37809645# Last one in FL, not a custody issue. https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/suspect-in-deerfield-beach-amber-alert-kidnapping-caught-in-miami-bso/2546490/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:02:35 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We can see this, did shooter see this? Was his perception the same as the camera, and ours at the time? /devils advocate Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: There is that whole fingers & opposable thumb thing humans use to grab with. His PALM is downward facing the entire time. He raised his forearm (while keeping his palm DOWN at all times) to move rifle muzzle away from him. Since his wrist never twisted or rolled to put the palm UPward to "Grab" anything, please explain how he "Grabbed" the rifle with the top of his palm. Maybe Velcro or Duct Tape or a he sprayed a bunch of "Stick'um" or what ... ... ... ? /devils advocate |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:02:45 PM EDT
[#8]
Not reading through all this, don't care about peoples' domestic quarrels, just curious if anyone ID'd the exact model rifle yet?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:03:02 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The one I remember (because a small town chief 400 miles away put up a statewide Amber at 1:30 in the AM, and then sent it to me again a half hour later when they recovered the kid, I got back to sleep the first time but not after the second one), the taking was forceful, but the risk of harm seemed more like a risk of absconding. They stopped the dad in a pickup truck a couple miles from the police station and recovered the kid without incident. Quote HistoryQuoted: The one I remember (because a small town chief 400 miles away put up a statewide Amber at 1:30 in the AM, and then sent it to me again a half hour later when they recovered the kid, I got back to sleep the first time but not after the second one), the taking was forceful, but the risk of harm seemed more like a risk of absconding. They stopped the dad in a pickup truck a couple miles from the police station and recovered the kid without incident. This is exactly my point. Most of these still rise in some regard from custody disputes where some or all of the facts get overinflated or 'tailored' to fit the AA criteria when they really don't. And this is expressly what the program tried to exclude when it was originally put together in the 90's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amber_alert#Activation_criteria A Scripps Howard study of the 233 AMBER Alerts issued in the United States in 2004 found that most issued alerts did not meet the Department of Justice's criteria. Fully 50% (117 alerts) were categorized by the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children as being "family abductions", very often a parent involved in a custody dispute. According to the 2014 Amber Alert Report, 186 Amber Alerts were issued in the US, involving 239 children; 60 were taken by strangers or people other than their legal guardians.[67] |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:03:26 PM EDT
[#10]
This looks a lot like murder to me.
Totality of circumstances; between the custody battle argument going on; and the dude not really being a threat at all until Shooter Goes, gets gun. And then, Warning shots (this is where he fucked himself) when they're chest puffing |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:05:10 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Last one in AL, not a custody issue. https://www.wvtm13.com/article/amber-alert-issued-alabama-15-year-old-girl-adrianna-griffin/37809645# Last one in FL, not a custody issue. https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/suspect-in-deerfield-beach-amber-alert-kidnapping-caught-in-miami-bso/2546490/ Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So how many have you seen that do NOT involve a parent, versus those that do? I can't remember a single one that didn't. Last one in AL, not a custody issue. https://www.wvtm13.com/article/amber-alert-issued-alabama-15-year-old-girl-adrianna-griffin/37809645# Last one in FL, not a custody issue. https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/suspect-in-deerfield-beach-amber-alert-kidnapping-caught-in-miami-bso/2546490/ I'm not asking for specious examples, but a comparison of those that DO involve a parent, versus those that do not. See my latest post with more data. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:07:58 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Anyone posted the relevant law on kidnapping? https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.20.htm The shooters actions appear to meet both criteria for abduction, though only one is required. The shooter is not a relative of the child, by the definition in this section, and since it was in violation of a court order, the intent to assume control was not lawful. A case could also be made for aggravated kidnapping, by (a)(5) since there seems to be evidence they intended to terrorize the father, and by (b) since the shooter used deadly force during the commission. Excellent argument, you have addressed each point completely. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:08:17 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This looks a lot like murder to me. Totality of circumstances; between the custody battle argument going on; and the dude not really being a threat at all until Shooter Goes, gets gun. And then, Warning shots (this is where he fucked himself) when they're chest puffing  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:10:58 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We can see this, did shooter see this? Was his perception the same as the camera, and ours at the time? /devils advocate Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: There is that whole fingers & opposable thumb thing humans use to grab with. His PALM is downward facing the entire time. He raised his forearm (while keeping his palm DOWN at all times) to move rifle muzzle away from him. Since his wrist never twisted or rolled to put the palm UPward to "Grab" anything, please explain how he "Grabbed" the rifle with the top of his palm. Maybe Velcro or Duct Tape or a he sprayed a bunch of "Stick'um" or what ... ... ... ? /devils advocate We do not know what the "perception" really was (or how it will be "spun" in court) - but the Camera doesn't lie & when D.A. Points that out to the Jury who see that with their very own eyes ...  It will be very difficult for the shooter to spin it as "That A-hole tried to take away my gun so I dun' shot him!"A smart DA will have a 3rd party hold gun & have the defendant put his hand underneath it and instruct him (in front of jury) to raise his hand without rolling wrist to show him & the jury how Bad Guy was going to "take away" the rifle (that he stated he feared would happen & was thus the reason he shot A-hole). That would be Devastating in court. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:12:18 PM EDT
[#15]
I bet that was a tough Thanksgiving with the new girlfriend. Well, kids I had to get it on, I had to kill your Dad because he wouldn't get off my porch. Could you pass me some white meat and gravy please.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:13:52 PM EDT
[#16]
Huh, apparently I'm in the minority that thinks that it's a bad idea to be threatening people in front of their house?
Not sure how custody works, but I don't think trying to shove people around is a great way to try to get "your" way. Green shirt sure seemed to be an aggressive asshole. Even says the cops are on the way, so why not stop pushing around people? If the kid wasn't there, isn't that something for the cops or court to settle? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:14:27 PM EDT
[#17]
Kids always lose....poor kid is going to go thru life knowing his Dad died trying to get his visitation time. Kid will always have guilt.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:15:05 PM EDT
[#18]
So there were no charges?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:15:21 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What do you think green shirt said, after being told to leave property. Do you think it could have been something that would make black shirt arm himself. We can't factor in any history, but black shirt might have known something. https://imgur.com/KQ86Tfp.gif Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This looks a lot like murder to me. Totality of circumstances; between the custody battle argument going on; and the dude not really being a threat at all until Shooter Goes, gets gun. And then, Warning shots (this is where he fucked himself) when they're chest puffing https://imgur.com/KQ86Tfp.gif Could be anything. A couple of possibilities: “Hey, stay the fuck out of it buddy.” “Fuck you. Make me.” “Look, I’m just here to get my kid.” I can’t really hear because he drops his voice. I tried listening on headphones. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:18:53 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Huh, apparently I'm in the minority that thinks that it's a bad idea to be threatening people in front of their house? Not sure how custody works, but I don't think trying to shove people around is a great way to try to get "your" way. Green shirt sure seemed to be an aggressive asshole. Even says the cops are on the way, so why not stop pushing around people? If the kid wasn't there, isn't that something for the cops or court to settle? I’m with you in this simplified take. It perfectly sums it up. It’s just our purple members here disagree and thats unfortunate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:18:59 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We do not know what the "perception" really was (or how it will be "spun" in court) - but the Camera doesn't lie & when D.A. Points that out to the Jury who see that with their very own eyes ... It will be very difficult for the shooter to spin it as "That A-hole tried to take away my gun so I dun' shot him!"A smart DA will have a 3rd party hold gun & have the defendant put his hand underneath it and instruct him (in front of jury) to raise his hand without rolling wrist to show him & the jury how Bad Guy was going to "take away" the rifle (that he stated he feared would happen & was thus the reason he shot A-hole). That would be Devastating in court. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: There is that whole fingers & opposable thumb thing humans use to grab with. His PALM is downward facing the entire time. He raised his forearm (while keeping his palm DOWN at all times) to move rifle muzzle away from him. Since his wrist never twisted or rolled to put the palm UPward to "Grab" anything, please explain how he "Grabbed" the rifle with the top of his palm. Maybe Velcro or Duct Tape or a he sprayed a bunch of "Stick'um" or what ... ... ... ? /devils advocate We do not know what the "perception" really was (or how it will be "spun" in court) - but the Camera doesn't lie & when D.A. Points that out to the Jury who see that with their very own eyes ... It will be very difficult for the shooter to spin it as "That A-hole tried to take away my gun so I dun' shot him!"A smart DA will have a 3rd party hold gun & have the defendant put his hand underneath it and instruct him (in front of jury) to raise his hand without rolling wrist to show him & the jury how Bad Guy was going to "take away" the rifle (that he stated he feared would happen & was thus the reason he shot A-hole). That would be Devastating in court. This also isn't the only time dudes hands were in contact with the gun. Again, devils advocate. Just pointing out that his perception at the time might have been perfectly reasonable, which is the standard it should be judged against. This was brought up when discussion video evidence in the Rittenhouse trial, if we recall. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:19:03 PM EDT
[#22]
I think the shooter is going to prison.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:21:03 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And when they don't you call the police. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Someone tells you to leave their property, you leave their property. And when they don't you call the police. No kids here, so not sure what legal right the dead guy had to be where he was, but if I find someone on my property, and isn't supposed to be there, and don't move to leave without causing harm, they will be at gunpoint from that point on. I'll call the cops for sure, but I'm not turning my back, and I'm not trusting a tresspasser. *I do live on a few acres mostly fenced. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:22:35 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think it was a bad shoot too. But three days later the shooter has not been arrested or charged. That would indicate a good shoot. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I think it was a bad shoot, but legal is a different enchilada. I think he is in the clear. I think it was a bad shoot too. But three days later the shooter has not been arrested or charged. That would indicate a good shoot. It took 72 days to charge and arrest the McMichaels |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:23:34 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Someone tells you to leave their property, you leave their property. What if they tell you to leave someone else's property? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:23:47 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What do you think green shirt said, after being told to leave property. Do you think it could have been something that would make black shirt arm himself. We can't factor in any history, but black shirt might have known something. https://imgur.com/KQ86Tfp.gif He had already planned on getting the gun when he turned and started heading inside the house |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:24:18 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My unwanted opinion is that, yes he went in to get the gun and they did have a lighthearted pushing contest, but then when guy with gun backs up some seconds go by and the guy SEEMED to be talking to the woman at that point and not even facing him? am I wrong? and then he shoots him dead while hes talking with his exwife. If he was actively charging gunman that would be a different story, or still engaged in mutual combat. I saw that as well. Second video, looks like dead guy is not even looking at the shooter when he gets shot |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:24:33 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Huh, apparently I'm in the minority that thinks that it's a bad idea to be threatening people in front of their house? Not sure how custody works, but I don't think trying to shove people around is a great way to try to get "your" way. Green shirt sure seemed to be an aggressive asshole. Even says the cops are on the way, so why not stop pushing around people? If the kid wasn't there, isn't that something for the cops or court to settle? Pretend for a second that your ex wife told you to come to her new boyfriend’s house to pick up your kids. When you get there, she gives you a song and dance about, “I want to see them. Come back at 6.” It’s a song and dance that she probably gives you a lot. She refuses to tell you where the kids are. Then the new boyfriend starts inserting himself into your domestic situation. Would you not be a little pissed that your ex wife is hiding your kids from you and your ex wife’s new boyfriend is getting between you and your kids? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:24:53 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It took 72 days to charge and arrest the McMichaels Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I think it was a bad shoot, but legal is a different enchilada. I think he is in the clear. I think it was a bad shoot too. But three days later the shooter has not been arrested or charged. That would indicate a good shoot. It took 72 days to charge and arrest the McMichaels Based on the facts and where it happened, this would most likely be a grand jury case rather than the prosecutor filing a complaint. JMO |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:25:26 PM EDT
[#30]
There is no pussy in the world that is good enough to fight over someone else's kids.
Retard shooter should get life for simping in the first degree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:25:42 PM EDT
[#31]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:26:01 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is no pussy in the world that is good enough to fight over someone else's kids. Retard shooter should get life for simping in the first degree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:26:06 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I just thought of an alternate situation. A 12 year old forgets it's the day dad picks him up and goes off with some friends after school. Maybe he tells mom where he went, maybe he just plans on showing up for supper. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That's the point. The kid wasn't there. They took the kid somewhere else, in violation of a court order. I just thought of an alternate situation. A 12 year old forgets it's the day dad picks him up and goes off with some friends after school. Maybe he tells mom where he went, maybe he just plans on showing up for supper. Yeah that's a reasonable situation. But I was under the impression that they told him that they had taken the kid somewhere else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:26:10 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: His life was never in danger until he brought a gun into a custody dispute. Lots of arguing, chest bumping...kinda like high school. Legal in Texas maybe, but legal don't always make right. I couldn't shoot a guy for that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Someone comes on your property yelling and threatening you, you run inside? You arm yourself and again tell them to leave repeatedly and they approach you, ultimately physically contacting you wile threatening you. Ohioans run inside? His life was never in danger until he brought a gun into a custody dispute. Lots of arguing, chest bumping...kinda like high school. Legal in Texas maybe, but legal don't always make right. I couldn't shoot a guy for that. Until he decides to start throwing fists and hurt you? I don't expect people to have to get into fisticuffs. I don't expect people to have to back down and let someone rampage. It is for sure the safe bet, and a lot of people aren't going to like the looks of going back in to get a gun. Only one guy has to live with killing someone in this situation, and I'm not the guy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:26:15 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No shit. I agree with you 100%. But hey, anything is possible in this clown world we inhabit now. Besides, if his attorney is anything like our old Barty Boy here, I'm pretty sure he's fooked. This is literally THE real-time "Get Off My Lawn" scenario that every Arfcommer has mentally masterbated to since the release of Gran Torino. Now they want to crucify Kyle. Chad is dead. Long live Kyle. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Are you not allowed to protect your property in texas? Regardless of why the “victim” was there, he was acting unreasonable and refused to leave when asked. He then escalated it to a physical altercation on the shooters property. He approached the shooter. Shooter has every right to bear arms on his own property, especially when someone’s there trespassing and acting erratic. No shit. I agree with you 100%. But hey, anything is possible in this clown world we inhabit now. Besides, if his attorney is anything like our old Barty Boy here, I'm pretty sure he's fooked. This is literally THE real-time "Get Off My Lawn" scenario that every Arfcommer has mentally masterbated to since the release of Gran Torino. Now they want to crucify Kyle. Chad is dead. Long live Kyle. You fantasize about shooting someone for being on your lawn? Especially a dad who had a court ordered legal appointment to see his son? How pathetic. Get help. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:28:13 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're either ignoring my point on purpose or just are missing it entirely. Assuming the court order stated they were to exchange at that time and place, one party not holding up their end of the deal isn't even in the same universe as kidnapping. You trying to equate it to aggravated kidnapping is just absolutely garbage. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Anyone posted the relevant law on kidnapping? https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.20.htm The shooters actions appear to meet both criteria for abduction, though only one is required. The shooter is not a relative of the child, by the definition in this section, and since it was in violation of a court order, the intent to assume control was not lawful. A case could also be made for aggravated kidnapping, by (a)(5) since there seems to be evidence they intended to terrorize the father, and by (b) since the shooter used deadly force during the commission. The kid wasn't even there and he wasn't keeping anyone from anyone. Your analysis is quite literally garbage. That's the point. The kid wasn't there. They took the kid somewhere else, in violation of a court order. You're either ignoring my point on purpose or just are missing it entirely. Assuming the court order stated they were to exchange at that time and place, one party not holding up their end of the deal isn't even in the same universe as kidnapping. You trying to equate it to aggravated kidnapping is just absolutely garbage. A court order does not have force of law in Texas? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:29:51 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Based on the facts and where it happened, this would most likely be a grand jury case rather than the prosecutor filing a complaint. JMO I know that with the McMichaels, they were cleared originally until the video came out. This deal, since the judge ex wife had to recuse herself and send the case to the state ag, that's probably why it's taking awhile to charge or not charge. I'm on the side of, this may end up being legal but it damn sure isn't moral or correct actions to take. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:32:02 PM EDT
[#38]
Guilty or innocent makes no difference to me in the battle of these two dumbasses.
That said, the sheer number of people here cheerleading for an asshole that intentionally sought to put himself between a father and his son is shitty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:32:57 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He had already planned on getting the gun when he turned and started heading inside the house Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What do you think green shirt said, after being told to leave property. Do you think it could have been something that would make black shirt arm himself. We can't factor in any history, but black shirt might have known something. https://imgur.com/KQ86Tfp.gif He had already planned on getting the gun when he turned and started heading inside the house Green shirt could have said, "This isn't your business", or he could have said, "I'll kill you". IMO It wasn't benign, because after black shirt walked away, green shirt followed. It looked aggressive. IMO. Maybe it was benign, we don't know, but black shirt took it as a reason to arm himself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:34:09 PM EDT
[#40]
I'm reading a lot on here about castle doctrine and stand your ground laws... y'all do realize none of those things circumvent the basic standard that you have to be in fear of serious injury or death to justify deadly force, right? You can't just kill anyone that comes on to your property or refuses to leave. Unless there's some serious backstory about Mr Deadguy being some super ninja bad ass, there's no justification here at all.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:35:45 PM EDT
[#41]
This looks more like a case where:
the guy in black decides to go get a gun in an attempt to intimidate the guy in green into leaving Green shirt calls the bluff and chest bumping begins (black shirt doesn't act like he's concerned with weapon retention Black gets mad when he's spun into the yard and shoots green shirt |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:36:27 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes, sure. Green shirt could have said something that warranted being armed. Green shirt could have said, "This isn't your business", or he could have said, "I'll kill you". IMO It wasn't a benign, because after black shirt walked away, green shirt followed. It looked aggressive. IMO. Maybe it was benign, we don't know, but black shirt took it as a reason to arm himself. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: What do you think green shirt said, after being told to leave property. Do you think it could have been something that would make black shirt arm himself. We can't factor in any history, but black shirt might have known something. https://imgur.com/KQ86Tfp.gif He had already planned on getting the gun when he turned and started heading inside the house Green shirt could have said, "This isn't your business", or he could have said, "I'll kill you". IMO It wasn't a benign, because after black shirt walked away, green shirt followed. It looked aggressive. IMO. Maybe it was benign, we don't know, but black shirt took it as a reason to arm himself. Maybe he said,this is between me and my ex, not you, so go back inside. Because it doesn't have anything to do with fuckboi Blackshirt. Never in a million years would I get between my wife and her ex husband over their kids. They aren't my kids. Now, if he was physically assaulting my wife, I'd shoot him. But that didn't happen here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:36:42 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is no pussy in the world that is good enough to fight over someone else's kids. Retard shooter should get life for simping in the first degree. Lulz, 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:37:51 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I know that with the McMichaels, they were cleared originally until the video came out. This deal, since the judge ex wife had to recuse herself and send the case to the state ag, that's probably why it's taking awhile to charge or not charge. I'm on the side of, this may end up being legal but it damn sure isn't moral or correct actions to take. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Based on the facts and where it happened, this would most likely be a grand jury case rather than the prosecutor filing a complaint. JMO I know that with the McMichaels, they were cleared originally until the video came out. This deal, since the judge ex wife had to recuse herself and send the case to the state ag, that's probably why it's taking awhile to charge or not charge. I'm on the side of, this may end up being legal but it damn sure isn't moral or correct actions to take. Yeah, I think the video release by the dead guys wife is going to hurt the shooter here.....just like in the McMichales case where they weren't charged until the video surfaced. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:38:09 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What if they tell you to leave someone else's property? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Someone tells you to leave their property, you leave their property. What if they tell you to leave someone else's property? Even if he is just staying there, it can be a legal residence. Granted most of that is a civil matter. Like right now, I'm at my girlfriends house. She's not here. She's not even in Texas. But if someone showed up that I didn't want here I could tell them to leave with force and be justified in doing so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:38:19 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It looked aggressive. IMO. Looks more like the typical behavior of someone that's mad at the situation but not close to being assaultive |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:40:08 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A court order does not have force of law in Texas? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Anyone posted the relevant law on kidnapping? https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.20.htm The shooters actions appear to meet both criteria for abduction, though only one is required. The shooter is not a relative of the child, by the definition in this section, and since it was in violation of a court order, the intent to assume control was not lawful. A case could also be made for aggravated kidnapping, by (a)(5) since there seems to be evidence they intended to terrorize the father, and by (b) since the shooter used deadly force during the commission. The kid wasn't even there and he wasn't keeping anyone from anyone. Your analysis is quite literally garbage. That's the point. The kid wasn't there. They took the kid somewhere else, in violation of a court order. You're either ignoring my point on purpose or just are missing it entirely. Assuming the court order stated they were to exchange at that time and place, one party not holding up their end of the deal isn't even in the same universe as kidnapping. You trying to equate it to aggravated kidnapping is just absolutely garbage. A court order does not have force of law in Texas? Custody matters are a civil issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:40:37 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not gonna lie, if someone tells me they're taking my gun from me, gets right up in my face, and I feel pressure on the gun... I'm assuming they've grabbed it. My eyes aren't where the camera is, I can't pause, pinch and zoom, slow down, or edit my real-time perception. This also isn't the only time dudes hands were in contact with the gun. Again, devils advocate. Just pointing out that his perception at the time might have been perfectly reasonable, which is the standard it should be judged against. This was brought up when discussion video evidence in the Rittenhouse trial, if we recall. He was asked to leave and refused. This meets trespass. Shooter had a legal right to be there and to be armed. He was within his right to use force at that point, but not deadly force. Dead guy then advanced on him, told him he was going to take his gun and use it on him, then grabbed, swatted, or whatever at the gun and then tossed the guy around. At this point I'd say he met the reasonable threshold of deadly force. Back it up 45 seconds and I would personally never have gotten involved outside of telling him to leave, telling GF to come inside, and then sit inside waiting for the police or him to leave. No need to go through anything further over a custody issue. It just seems from how Texas castle doctrine and stand your ground is written the guy is clear on this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:43:19 PM EDT
[#49]
I don't know if it was justifiable or not, but the guy in the blue shirt sure put a lot of effort into getting himself shot. That much I can tell you for sure.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 2:44:01 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm where you are at from a legal standpoint. He was asked to leave and refused. This meets trespass. Shooter had a legal right to be there and to be armed. He was within his right to use force at that point, but not deadly force. Dead guy then advanced on him, told him he was going to take his gun and use it on him, then grabbed, swatted, or whatever at the gun and then tossed the guy around. At this point I'd say he met the reasonable threshold of deadly force. Back it up 45 seconds and I would personally never have gotten involved outside of telling him to leave, telling GF to come inside, and then sit inside waiting for the police or him to leave. No need to go through anything further over a custody issue. It just seems from how Texas castle doctrine and stand your ground is written the guy is clear on this. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm not gonna lie, if someone tells me they're taking my gun from me, gets right up in my face, and I feel pressure on the gun... I'm assuming they've grabbed it. My eyes aren't where the camera is, I can't pause, pinch and zoom, slow down, or edit my real-time perception. This also isn't the only time dudes hands were in contact with the gun. Again, devils advocate. Just pointing out that his perception at the time might have been perfectly reasonable, which is the standard it should be judged against. This was brought up when discussion video evidence in the Rittenhouse trial, if we recall. He was asked to leave and refused. This meets trespass. Shooter had a legal right to be there and to be armed. He was within his right to use force at that point, but not deadly force. Dead guy then advanced on him, told him he was going to take his gun and use it on him, then grabbed, swatted, or whatever at the gun and then tossed the guy around. At this point I'd say he met the reasonable threshold of deadly force. Back it up 45 seconds and I would personally never have gotten involved outside of telling him to leave, telling GF to come inside, and then sit inside waiting for the police or him to leave. No need to go through anything further over a custody issue. It just seems from how Texas castle doctrine and stand your ground is written the guy is clear on this. Nailed it. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
