User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 4:40:17 PM EDT
[#1]
Wow this is a fucking mess.
Dad should have showed up with custody paperwork in hand and called the cops and waited in the vehicle if they were withholding his kid. Mommas bf/step dad should have stayed inside. The kid wasn’t even at the house. Then called the cops if necessary. He doesn’t even mention the kid isn’t there until after the shooting. IMO that fact alone is escalating on his part. He could have started there and dad would have had a reason to leave right there. Poor kid regardless. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 4:43:09 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wow this is a fucking mess. Dad should have showed up with custody paperwork in hand and called the cops and waited in the vehicle if they were withholding his kid. Mommas bf/step dad should have stayed inside. The kid wasn’t even at the house. Then called the cops if necessary. He doesn’t even mention the kid isn’t there until after the shooting. IMO that fact alone is escalating on his part. He could have started there and dad would have had a reason to leave right there. Poor kid regardless. Nothing the police could have done. It's a civil matter. But, you're not wrong on how things should have gone down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 4:45:21 PM EDT
[#3]
That's MURDER.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 4:46:56 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nothing the police could have done. It's a civil matter. But, you're not wrong on how things should have gone down. Not true regarding nothing the police could do. Unfortunately I have been in this situation and if you have the right paperwork on hand AND you get a good cop then they can do something. But yeah fighting in your kids front yard is never the answer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 4:47:14 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That’s my issue here, we don’t all the facts. Like let’s say in the KR trial, what if video came out with Kyle saying “look how angry they get when I put out fires they started. I am going to keep putting out fires until someone attacks me, that way I can shoot them.” (Or something similar to this, I am sure you get the idea.) Binger asks him on the stand “So why were you there that night?” Kyle “I hate the rioters and was looking for a reason to kill someone, I wanted them to attack me so I could kill them” His actions would have been the same as they were in reality, but his intentions would have been different. So take that example to this case, what if the shooter planned this out, “I am going to not give him his kid and I know he has a temper and won’t leave so I am going to make a situation where I can shoot him”. The actions are the same either way, but the intentions are different. I know intentions are difficult to prove, but let’s say the girlfriend comes out and says the shooter was looking to create a situation where he could shoot the guy and claim self defense, like those are his explicit intentions. Can the shooter still claim self defense if he deliberately hid the kid to create a confrontation with the explicit purpose of shooting someone? I know this is all just speculation on my part, but it’s just an example how background information might change things. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The chest bumping and verbal exchange after shooter returns with the gun sort of refutes that he was in fear for his life, he appears more ego driven at that moment when things really escalated. The fact that dead guy wasn't apparently advancing when shot also doesn't help. And when shooter raises the gun and fires, it looks very calm and deliberate to me, like he had already decided. The bare facts of the case, when recited, sound like a justified shooting. But my guess is that if a jury sees the videos, it will be a manslaughter conviction at least. That’s my issue here, we don’t all the facts. Like let’s say in the KR trial, what if video came out with Kyle saying “look how angry they get when I put out fires they started. I am going to keep putting out fires until someone attacks me, that way I can shoot them.” (Or something similar to this, I am sure you get the idea.) Binger asks him on the stand “So why were you there that night?” Kyle “I hate the rioters and was looking for a reason to kill someone, I wanted them to attack me so I could kill them” His actions would have been the same as they were in reality, but his intentions would have been different. So take that example to this case, what if the shooter planned this out, “I am going to not give him his kid and I know he has a temper and won’t leave so I am going to make a situation where I can shoot him”. The actions are the same either way, but the intentions are different. I know intentions are difficult to prove, but let’s say the girlfriend comes out and says the shooter was looking to create a situation where he could shoot the guy and claim self defense, like those are his explicit intentions. Can the shooter still claim self defense if he deliberately hid the kid to create a confrontation with the explicit purpose of shooting someone? I know this is all just speculation on my part, but it’s just an example how background information might change things. A subpoena for black shirt and side piece's text messages might be very illuminating. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 4:49:54 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If needed... The guy was threatening to take him to court  He did more than threaten to "take him to court". How can you not acknowledge that after watching the video? He was in the guys face threatening him verbally and physically. Notice while he is advancing on the ex-wife, she is backing up. Dude showed his ass and got killed for it. Good shoot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 4:50:03 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not true regarding nothing the police could do. Unfortunately I have been in this situation and if you have the right paperwork on hand AND you get a good cop then they can do something. But yeah fighting in your kids front yard is never the answer. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Nothing the police could have done. It's a civil matter. But, you're not wrong on how things should have gone down. Not true regarding nothing the police could do. Unfortunately I have been in this situation and if you have the right paperwork on hand AND you get a good cop then they can do something. But yeah fighting in your kids front yard is never the answer. Tell me you don't know Texas law without telling me you don't know Texas law. Custody issues are civil issues. If she doesn't produce the kid the ONLY recourse the dad would have is to take it to the courts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 4:53:08 PM EDT
[#8]
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? It has the force of civil law, not criminal law. aYou go back to the family court judge and tell the judge how the court ordered visitation was not adhered to. The judge then decides what the penalty will be. Short of childsnatching violating a family court order for visitation isn't a crime. It certainly isn't kidnapping. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 4:54:33 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Someone tells you to leave their property, you leave their property. And what about when they're standing in the way? I think the prosecutor is really going to outline that to the jury. The shooter is in the yard pointing the gun back toward the deceased who is standing on the porch facing out toward the street, his presumable path of escape. It's only justifiable if dead guy advances on the shooter, IMO. But..... if dead guy tries to escape then he's advancing on the shooter. He's effectively trapped by Napoleon with the gun. Also, for the 'muh property' guys: There's quite a bit of ground to cover between trespassing and justifiable homicide. I'm not a lawyer but I've been to jury duty before, and as a responsible gun and property owner, the "he wouldn't leave so I shot him" defense isn't going to work if I'm on the bench. From the video it's pretty obvious that Napoleon's ego was bruised when he was flung out into the yard. He didn't wait 2 seconds before he made the decision to kill the guy. Here's what you do: Hold the guy on the porch, call 911 and tell them exactly what's happening. If the guy advances in a threatening manner, drop him. That's a pretty vital step in the process because if you skip it then you're going to the joint. I think if Thundercock McProperty had waited 10 more seconds for Gigachad to make a move then he'd have been justified. But as the video shows, dead guy was standing there with nowhere to go. Almost... aaaallllmost a good shoot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 4:55:40 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Whatever terminology you want to use, it's clear to me the guy used his hands and fingers to (grab, grasp, hold) the shooter and the weapon in a manner that allowed him to pull the shooter towards him, spin him around 180 degrees, and launch him off the porch. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_52_53_AM-2181934.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_48_AM-2181935.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_21_AM-2181936.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_11_13_25_AM-2181938.png That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:00:40 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Whatever terminology you want to use, it's clear to me the guy used his hands and fingers to (grab, grasp, hold) the shooter and the weapon in a manner that allowed him to pull the shooter towards him, spin him around 180 degrees, and launch him off the porch. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_52_53_AM-2181934.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_48_AM-2181935.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_21_AM-2181936.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_11_13_25_AM-2181938.png That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then. The first shot is referencing the one which was pointed downwards into the porch floorboards? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:00:51 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Whatever terminology you want to use, it's clear to me the guy used his hands and fingers to (grab, grasp, hold) the shooter and the weapon in a manner that allowed him to pull the shooter towards him, spin him around 180 degrees, and launch him off the porch. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_52_53_AM-2181934.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_48_AM-2181935.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_21_AM-2181936.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_11_13_25_AM-2181938.png That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:01:43 PM EDT
[#13]
This might be a case where he can technically get off but it will be difficult to convince me Kyle getting the gun wasn’t the reason and point at which this situation changed. The lady was so worried about dead guy she was looking at her phone.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:02:02 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Green shirt gets physical, threatens to take an use gun. He looks down, raises arm. Reaches for magazine. It looks like Black shirt thought so as well, based on how he jerks the rifle back. Fires "warning" shot. Green shirt grabs gun, swings black shirt into yard. https://i.imgur.com/qEwFwky.gif Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Whatever terminology you want to use, it's clear to me the guy used his hands and fingers to (grab, grasp, hold) the shooter and the weapon in a manner that allowed him to pull the shooter towards him, spin him around 180 degrees, and launch him off the porch. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_52_53_AM-2181934.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_48_AM-2181935.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_21_AM-2181936.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_11_13_25_AM-2181938.png That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then. https://i.imgur.com/qEwFwky.gif Is it a “warning shot” or ND? Can anyone confirm either with vetted information? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:02:02 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Notice while he is advancing on the ex-wife, she is backing up. Then Green shirt bio dad moved away and ex-wife is looking at her phone. Probably playing Candy Crush. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:02:14 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Tell me you don't know Texas law without telling me you don't know Texas law. Custody issues are civil issues. If she doesn't produce the kid the ONLY recourse the dad would have is to take it to the courts. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Nothing the police could have done. It's a civil matter. But, you're not wrong on how things should have gone down. Not true regarding nothing the police could do. Unfortunately I have been in this situation and if you have the right paperwork on hand AND you get a good cop then they can do something. But yeah fighting in your kids front yard is never the answer. Tell me you don't know Texas law without telling me you don't know Texas law. Custody issues are civil issues. If she doesn't produce the kid the ONLY recourse the dad would have is to take it to the courts. It’s a civil matter here as well. Didn’t know we were in the company of a Texas lawyer that moonlights as a police officer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:02:38 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He did more than threaten to "take him to court". How can you not acknowledge that after watching the video? He was in the guys face threatening him verbally and physically. Notice while he is advancing on the ex-wife, she is backing up. Dude showed his ass and got killed for it. Good shoot. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: If needed... The guy was threatening to take him to court He did more than threaten to "take him to court". How can you not acknowledge that after watching the video? He was in the guys face threatening him verbally and physically. Notice while he is advancing on the ex-wife, she is backing up. Dude showed his ass and got killed for it. Good shoot. Ok, be ignorant if the law, I don't care. I hope you don't end up in prison with this moron. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:03:54 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Then Green shirt bio dad moved away and ex-wife is looking at her phone. Probably playing Candy Crush. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Notice while he is advancing on the ex-wife, she is backing up. Then Green shirt bio dad moved away and ex-wife is looking at her phone. Probably playing Candy Crush. No, there is definitely an instance showing exactly what JarHead94 mentions. Some time around the one minute mark, if I remember correctly. I also mentioned the same around page 20ish (I think). ETA: Sorry, watch around the 00:28 second mark. ETAx2: At 00:28 seconds into the video, black shirt already went into the house and green shirt guy approaches ex-wife in the yard. There’s about 6ft between the two when he takes a slight step towards her. It didn’t look like he was going to take a second step forward but when he took the small step towards her, watch her take a step back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:04:27 PM EDT
[#19]
I remember as a kid an old guy who had several guns tell me there were several time he was glad he didn’t have one on him. This seems like one of those time for Kyle.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:06:50 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Here's what you do: Hold the guy on the porch, call 911 and tell them exactly what's happening. If the guy advances in a threatening manner, drop him. He did that lol. He came out. Said leave now. Not the first time he told him to leave. The dude runs up on him and touches him. Could have shot him there but he didnt. The nose touching and warning shots wont help him in court. Its gonna be a fun case at trial. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:07:38 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And what about when they're standing in the way? I think the prosecutor is really going to outline that to the jury. The shooter is in the yard pointing the gun back toward the deceased who is standing on the porch facing out toward the street, his presumable path of escape. It's only justifiable if dead guy advances on the shooter, IMO. But..... if dead guy tries to escape then he's advancing on the shooter. He's effectively trapped by Napoleon with the gun. Also, for the 'muh property' guys: There's quite a bit of ground to cover between trespassing and justifiable homicide. I'm not a lawyer but I've been to jury duty before, and as a responsible gun and property owner, the "he wouldn't leave so I shot him" defense isn't going to work if I'm on the bench. From the video it's pretty obvious that Napoleon's ego was bruised when he was flung out into the yard. He didn't wait 2 seconds before he made the decision to kill the guy. Here's what you do: Hold the guy on the porch, call 911 and tell them exactly what's happening. If the guy advances in a threatening manner, drop him. That's a pretty vital step in the process because if you skip it then you're going to the joint. I think if Thundercock McProperty had waited 10 more seconds for Gigachad to make a move then he'd have been justified. But as the video shows, dead guy was standing there with nowhere to go. Almost... aaaallllmost a good shoot. I never said anything about "good shoot". Think the dead guy cares that it was a bad shoot? He's deaded deader and dead. When someone tells you to get get off their property, get off their property. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:10:03 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don’t want to misquote you here. Are you saying in TX if someone who doesn’t own the property tells you to leave, it doesn’t matter that you have permission from the actual owner? You don't have to be legally on the title or lease contract to legally be a resident of the property, and those rights legally belong to the resident. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:10:54 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He did that lol. He came out. Said leave now. Not the first time he told him to leave. The dude runs up on him and touches him. Could have shot him there but he didnt. The nose touching and warning shots wont help him in court. Its gonna be a fun case at trial. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Here's what you do: Hold the guy on the porch, call 911 and tell them exactly what's happening. If the guy advances in a threatening manner, drop him. He did that lol. He came out. Said leave now. Not the first time he told him to leave. The dude runs up on him and touches him. Could have shot him there but he didnt. The nose touching and warning shots wont help him in court. Its gonna be a fun case at trial. He could have stood at the door and called the police. He got pissed off, ran inside and got the gun, then confronted the unarmed man face to face. That's not self defense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:11:47 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ok, be ignorant if the law, I don't care. I hope you don't end up in prison with this moron. I'm not ignorant of Texas law. You, on the other hand.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:12:08 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I never said anything about "good shoot". Think the dead guy cares that it was a bad shoot? He's deaded deader and dead. When someone tells you to get get off their property, get off their property. I share that opinion. Go, screaming if you must, just go. Be an asshole all you want, just be an asshole finding your way off private property. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:12:33 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is it a "warning shot" or ND? Can anyone confirm either with vetted information? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Whatever terminology you want to use, it's clear to me the guy used his hands and fingers to (grab, grasp, hold) the shooter and the weapon in a manner that allowed him to pull the shooter towards him, spin him around 180 degrees, and launch him off the porch. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_52_53_AM-2181934.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_48_AM-2181935.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_21_AM-2181936.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_11_13_25_AM-2181938.png That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then. https://i.imgur.com/qEwFwky.gif Is it a "warning shot" or ND? Can anyone confirm either with vetted information? He was threatened, assaulted, and may have believed green shirt was following through and trying to disarm him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:14:32 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He could have stood at the door and called the police. He got pissed off, ran inside and got the gun, then confronted the unarmed man face to face. That's not self defense. The court will decide that. I don’t really care one way or the other. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:15:56 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't know. It looks intentional. It looks like black shirt thought green shirt was going for gun, and shot. Why did he shoot down? Maybe he was concerned about over penetration, maybe he was worried about another gun grab. ??? He was threatened, assaulted, and may have believed green shirt was following through and trying to disarm him. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Whatever terminology you want to use, it's clear to me the guy used his hands and fingers to (grab, grasp, hold) the shooter and the weapon in a manner that allowed him to pull the shooter towards him, spin him around 180 degrees, and launch him off the porch. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_52_53_AM-2181934.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_48_AM-2181935.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_21_AM-2181936.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_11_13_25_AM-2181938.png That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then. https://i.imgur.com/qEwFwky.gif Is it a "warning shot" or ND? Can anyone confirm either with vetted information? He was threatened, assaulted, and may have believed green shirt was following through and trying to disarm him. I can certainly see that as a possibility. The nudge by green shirt prior to the discharge is very visible as is black shirt’s reaction to that nudge. ETA: Black shirt’s focus was on green shirt’s face during that timeframe and black shirt felt green shirt made a move towards his firearm. This is on the tail side of green shirt’s threat to forcibly take his firearm from him and (??????). |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:23:46 PM EDT
[#29]
Prison bitch status, he has it. Enjoy your salad.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:24:39 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can certainly see that as a possibility. The nudge by green shirt prior to the discharge is very visible as is black shirt’s reaction to that nudge. ETA: Black shirt’s focus was on green shirt’s face during that timeframe and black shirt felt green shirt made a move towards his firearm. This is on the tail side of green shirt’s threat to forcibly take his firearm from him and (??????). Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Whatever terminology you want to use, it's clear to me the guy used his hands and fingers to (grab, grasp, hold) the shooter and the weapon in a manner that allowed him to pull the shooter towards him, spin him around 180 degrees, and launch him off the porch. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_52_53_AM-2181934.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_48_AM-2181935.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_21_AM-2181936.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_11_13_25_AM-2181938.png That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then. https://i.imgur.com/qEwFwky.gif Is it a "warning shot" or ND? Can anyone confirm either with vetted information? He was threatened, assaulted, and may have believed green shirt was following through and trying to disarm him. I can certainly see that as a possibility. The nudge by green shirt prior to the discharge is very visible as is black shirt’s reaction to that nudge. ETA: Black shirt’s focus was on green shirt’s face during that timeframe and black shirt felt green shirt made a move towards his firearm. This is on the tail side of green shirt’s threat to forcibly take his firearm from him and (??????). |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:25:41 PM EDT
[#31]
Where do we donate to that dumbass’s prison soap on a rope fund?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:26:43 PM EDT
[#32]
Wow baby momma really knows how to destroy lives.
Not to mention that cops don't care about enforcing visitation for dad's. Bad shoot, bad escalation on all sides, and screw the family courts/law/LEO for destroying one kids life by eliminating the father here and broadly speaking society's fatherhood. Tragedy all around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:28:34 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We don’t know how much force black shirt was pressing/ twisting the gun into green shirt to get the gun pushed back. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Whatever terminology you want to use, it's clear to me the guy used his hands and fingers to (grab, grasp, hold) the shooter and the weapon in a manner that allowed him to pull the shooter towards him, spin him around 180 degrees, and launch him off the porch. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_52_53_AM-2181934.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_48_AM-2181935.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_21_AM-2181936.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_11_13_25_AM-2181938.png That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then. https://i.imgur.com/qEwFwky.gif Is it a "warning shot" or ND? Can anyone confirm either with vetted information? He was threatened, assaulted, and may have believed green shirt was following through and trying to disarm him. I can certainly see that as a possibility. The nudge by green shirt prior to the discharge is very visible as is black shirt’s reaction to that nudge. ETA: Black shirt’s focus was on green shirt’s face during that timeframe and black shirt felt green shirt made a move towards his firearm. This is on the tail side of green shirt’s threat to forcibly take his firearm from him and (??????). Thats true but what is your point? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:28:45 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: From what I understand of the case (it's hard to be sure of the details), this is more or less my take. The dead guy wasn't some drugged up vagrant who showed up with a hatchet. He was there to execute a legally binding agreement. The shooter was a party to the breach of that agreement, and in so doing antagonized the dead guy. Everybody's getting hot and bothered about "muh property rights," but the mom and the shooter seem to have been unlawfully preventing him from taking custody of his kid. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: He has a court order stating he can be there to pick up his child if that was the agreement. He has EVERY right to be there if that was the case and she agreed to it. The shooter cannot legally defy the court agreement all concerned parties agreed to when it was signed by the judge/court and barring any further orders, he should just STFU because he is a non custodial entity with zero legal rights concerning the child or visitation in the eyes of the court. He 100% interfered, broke off, got a gun, escalated it and then shot the father. Unless there is serious hanky panky by the local courts/judge/prosc atty, he is in the wrong and after a fair trial and the actual facts, should be found guilty. He escalated a non violent, non physical disagreement that the father was 100% correct on into a murder. If the father had drawn and shot when he threatened him, he would be legal in the eyes of a legit court. And if it turns out it was not even his house, he is even more in the wrong and I still can't figure that out one way or the other. From what I understand of the case (it's hard to be sure of the details), this is more or less my take. The dead guy wasn't some drugged up vagrant who showed up with a hatchet. He was there to execute a legally binding agreement. The shooter was a party to the breach of that agreement, and in so doing antagonized the dead guy. Everybody's getting hot and bothered about "muh property rights," but the mom and the shooter seem to have been unlawfully preventing him from taking custody of his kid. And had been having an affair which led to the mom and dad getting separated and divorced. Any guy that sleeps with a married woman is a piece of shit. And fuck cheating whores as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:29:04 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He did that lol. He came out. Said leave now. Not the first time he told him to leave. The dude runs up on him and touches him. Could have shot him there but he didnt. The nose touching and warning shots wont help him in court. Its gonna be a fun case at trial. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Here's what you do: Hold the guy on the porch, call 911 and tell them exactly what's happening. If the guy advances in a threatening manner, drop him. He did that lol. He came out. Said leave now. Not the first time he told him to leave. The dude runs up on him and touches him. Could have shot him there but he didnt. The nose touching and warning shots wont help him in court. Its gonna be a fun case at trial. Needs Less arguing and more Poll of murder or not to settle it... Also, serious question, if someone runs up on you and touches you on or off your property CAN you shoot them? I dont know, maybe in the stand your ground states? but that seems like a huge escalation from laying hands to death.? what about with telling someone to get off your property and they dont? you can kill them? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:29:45 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryCame to post this. Just listened. They all agreed it's a difficult case but Nick thinks it's legal |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:29:51 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We don’t know how much force black shirt was pressing/ twisting the gun into green shirt to get the gun pushed back. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Whatever terminology you want to use, it's clear to me the guy used his hands and fingers to (grab, grasp, hold) the shooter and the weapon in a manner that allowed him to pull the shooter towards him, spin him around 180 degrees, and launch him off the porch. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_52_53_AM-2181934.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_48_AM-2181935.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_10_53_21_AM-2181936.pnghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/367483/Screen_Shot_2021-11-26_at_11_13_25_AM-2181938.png That was definitely after the first shot. All bets are off then. https://i.imgur.com/qEwFwky.gif Is it a "warning shot" or ND? Can anyone confirm either with vetted information? He was threatened, assaulted, and may have believed green shirt was following through and trying to disarm him. I can certainly see that as a possibility. The nudge by green shirt prior to the discharge is very visible as is black shirt’s reaction to that nudge. ETA: Black shirt’s focus was on green shirt’s face during that timeframe and black shirt felt green shirt made a move towards his firearm. This is on the tail side of green shirt’s threat to forcibly take his firearm from him and (??????). If he had really wanted to take it from the shooter, he could have easily grabbed it and controlled it with both hands when they were chest to chest and the carbine was sideways between the two. Left hand grabs under the barrel, right hand grasps the stock and twist and rotate and shooters would have never been able to hold onto it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:30:50 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Needs Less arguing and more Poll of murder or not to settle it... Also, serious question, if someone runs up on you and touches you on or off your property CAN you shoot them? I dont know, maybe in the stand your ground states? but that seems like a huge escalation from laying hands to death.? what about with telling someone to get off your property and they dont? you can kill them? Whoa…that’s not what happened. Not even close. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:33:02 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Whoa…that’s not what happened. Not even close. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Needs Less arguing and more Poll of murder or not to settle it... Also, serious question, if someone runs up on you and touches you on or off your property CAN you shoot them? I dont know, maybe in the stand your ground states? but that seems like a huge escalation from laying hands to death.? what about with telling someone to get off your property and they dont? you can kill them? Whoa…that’s not what happened. Not even close. No im genuinely asking the question, not saying that's what happened but that's what people are generalizing |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:34:32 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You don't have to be legally on the title or lease contract to legally be a resident of the property, and those rights legally belong to the resident. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I don’t want to misquote you here. Are you saying in TX if someone who doesn’t own the property tells you to leave, it doesn’t matter that you have permission from the actual owner? You don't have to be legally on the title or lease contract to legally be a resident of the property, and those rights legally belong to the resident. Here are in KY it’s where you dwell. What folks don’t get is after being repeatedly told to leave, the THREAT of deadly force is lawfull ( coming out with a gun). The USE of deadly force to get them to leave is not. When dead guy came up on him and verbal threat of using it against the guy telling him repeatedly to leave…now deadly force is authorized. That’s why it’s justifiable, and it’s all caught on camera. “He said he was going to take my gun and use it on me, I certainly believed him and feared for my life. Video shows he was clearly capable of carrying out that imminent threat to my life” We had a very similar case here in ky. Very similar. No charges filed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:35:13 PM EDT
[#41]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:35:24 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Needs Less arguing and more Poll of murder or not to settle it... Also, serious question, if someone runs up on you and touches you on or off your property CAN you shoot them? I dont know, maybe in the stand your ground states? but that seems like a huge escalation from laying hands to death.? what about with telling someone to get off your property and they dont? you can kill them? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Here's what you do: Hold the guy on the porch, call 911 and tell them exactly what's happening. If the guy advances in a threatening manner, drop him. He did that lol. He came out. Said leave now. Not the first time he told him to leave. The dude runs up on him and touches him. Could have shot him there but he didnt. The nose touching and warning shots wont help him in court. Its gonna be a fun case at trial. Needs Less arguing and more Poll of murder or not to settle it... Also, serious question, if someone runs up on you and touches you on or off your property CAN you shoot them? I dont know, maybe in the stand your ground states? but that seems like a huge escalation from laying hands to death.? what about with telling someone to get off your property and they dont? you can kill them? Are you saying that sometimes you have to take a punch/beating? Sounds…. Familiar.  If I warn someone several times to leave and they move towards me aggressively I guess we’ll see what happens. I ran a methhead off one night. To my shame I somehow ended up with the 870 instead of an AR. Luckily she ran off before I had to tear meat from bone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:35:35 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No im genuinely asking the question, not saying that's what happened but that's what people are generalizing Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Needs Less arguing and more Poll of murder or not to settle it... Also, serious question, if someone runs up on you and touches you on or off your property CAN you shoot them? I dont know, maybe in the stand your ground states? but that seems like a huge escalation from laying hands to death.? what about with telling someone to get off your property and they dont? you can kill them? Whoa…that’s not what happened. Not even close. No im genuinely asking the question, not saying that's what happened but that's what people are generalizing I haven’t read every post in the thread so wouldn’t say that’s untrue but I have read quite a bit of the thread and can’t say I can recall such a claim made by anyone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:37:38 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If needed... The guy was threatening to take him to court Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: This is where your train goes off the rails. If he has the right to use force, but not deadly force (I don't agree, but these were your words), he can't justify walking into the house and grabbing his rifle. He murdered the guy, plain and simple. What else is on your arbitrary list of times when you aren't within your legal rights to arm yourself and defend yourself on your own property? Mine is pretty short - if lawfully ordered by authorities. If needed... The guy was threatening to take him to court Yes I think the shooter is a slime bag because of the particular situation. It just doesn't bear on my ability to see who was the obvious aggressor here. It is one thing to empathize with the guy, and put yourself in his shoes. But if you do so, are you really honestly suggesting you, as an unarmed person on someone else's property that has been told to leave multiple times, would make the actual threat that was made, to take the gun and kill him with it? And butt up against him, square off, chest thump, and even if you wouldn't accept he reached to grab it the first time, would you start trying to knock it around and not expect this outcome? Once he has the gun the situation has certainly changed, and remaining there threatening him and then trying to disarm him is not just stupid as hell, it's illegal. It was not illegal to arm himself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:37:39 PM EDT
[#45]
You all need to watch the rekeita law break down. They go over everything, from what was said to statutes. Green shirt made zero threats other than subpoenas for everyone, black shirt goes inside to get gun, comes out and green shirt goes nipple to neck with black shirt, brushes gun away, then feet shot, then gun grab and spin into yard, then kills him. Green shirt made no threats until the gun came out. According to the invoice of lawyers on rekeita, those threats don't mean shit. I stick with thinking it may end up being legal but it's going to be up to a jury. Wouldn't ever do what black shirt, Napoleon syndrome, did. Oh and rekeita said never ever ever fire a warning shot, regardless of what state you are in
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:37:51 PM EDT
[#46]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:38:13 PM EDT
[#47]
https://kfyo.com/kyle-carruth-talks-possible-lubbock-city-council-ban-of-firearms-video/
Speaking about the three firearms-related resolutions that will be considered tonight, Carruth said, "Many people view this as a type of incrementalism. I mean, they're chipping away at our Constitutional rights, little by little. Not to mention the sheer fact that, I mean it's a flat out Hillary Clinton style gun ban that they're trying to impose upon the citizens of Lubbock." Carruth continued with, "They do not have the right to deny citizens the ability to protect themselves in there." |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:40:17 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Tell me you don't know Texas law without telling me you don't know Texas law. Custody issues are civil issues. If she doesn't produce the kid the ONLY recourse the dad would have is to take it to the courts. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Nothing the police could have done. It's a civil matter. But, you're not wrong on how things should have gone down. Not true regarding nothing the police could do. Unfortunately I have been in this situation and if you have the right paperwork on hand AND you get a good cop then they can do something. But yeah fighting in your kids front yard is never the answer. Tell me you don't know Texas law without telling me you don't know Texas law. Custody issues are civil issues. If she doesn't produce the kid the ONLY recourse the dad would have is to take it to the courts. Not quite, Interference With Child Custody Apparently in Texas they don't like to enforce this particular law. Special Report: Interference with child custody not enforced in Texas A KFOX14 special assignment has discovered it is the unwritten policy of Texas law enforcement to not make arrests or charge persons with the crime of interference with child custody. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:40:51 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You all need to watch the rekeita law break down. They go over everything, from what was said to statutes. Green shirt made zero threats other than subpoenas for everyone, black shirt goes inside to get gun, comes out and green shirt goes nipple to neck with black shirt, brushes gun away, then feet shot, then gun grab and spin into yard, then kills him. Green shirt made no threats until the gun came out. According to the invoice of lawyers on rekeita, those threats don't mean shit. I stick with thinking it may end up being legal but it's going to be up to a jury. Does a threat need to be verbal? After being told to leave and refusing to do so, instead continue yelling, pointing, walking around…does that not seem threatening *under such circumstance? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 5:41:23 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://kfyo.com/kyle-carruth-talks-possible-lubbock-city-council-ban-of-firearms-video/ Speaking about the three firearms-related resolutions that will be considered tonight, Carruth said, "Many people view this as a type of incrementalism. I mean, they're chipping away at our Constitutional rights, little by little. Not to mention the sheer fact that, I mean it's a flat out Hillary Clinton style gun ban that they're trying to impose upon the citizens of Lubbock." Carruth continued with, "They do not have the right to deny citizens the ability to protect themselves in there." Kyle's probably going to lose his right to own firearms. He may be pro 2A but he's a moron |
|
|
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.
