User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 5:31:12 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe some yall are right, i just dont see this at self-defense. I looked more like a shoving match, that black shirt guy was more chicken shit and resorted to escalating it to shooting him. His property and all that, Green shirt escalated by verbally threatening and armed mans life and attempting to carry out that threat. That’s why it’s so clear cut. Checks every single box of authorized deadly force. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 5:57:53 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How do you know these things? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm betting this is not the first time she has played fuck-fuck games during visitation times. Everybody has their cellphones out. 100% guaranteed. How do you know these things? Because green shirt’s whole rant was about the kid not being there, the ex wife keeping his son from him, him sending the cops to the ex wife’s mother’s house, and him hauling them all into court. All captured on video from multiple angles. That kind of stuff doesn’t happen the first time ex wife doesn’t produce the kid. That’s a reaction to a pattern of behavior. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 6:00:36 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because green shirt’s whole rant was about the kid not being there, the ex wife keeping his son from him, him sending the cops to the ex wife’s mother’s house, and him hauling them all into court. All captured on video from multiple angles. That kind of stuff doesn’t happen the first time ex wife doesn’t produce the kid. That’s a reaction to a pattern of behavior. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm betting this is not the first time she has played fuck-fuck games during visitation times. Everybody has their cellphones out. 100% guaranteed. How do you know these things? Because green shirt’s whole rant was about the kid not being there, the ex wife keeping his son from him, him sending the cops to the ex wife’s mother’s house, and him hauling them all into court. All captured on video from multiple angles. That kind of stuff doesn’t happen the first time ex wife doesn’t produce the kid. That’s a reaction to a pattern of behavior. You’ll be hard pressed to convince me this isnt the outcome the women wanted and planned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 6:02:05 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You’ll be hard pressed to convince me this isnt the outcome the women wanted and planned. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm betting this is not the first time she has played fuck-fuck games during visitation times. Everybody has their cellphones out. 100% guaranteed. How do you know these things? Because green shirt’s whole rant was about the kid not being there, the ex wife keeping his son from him, him sending the cops to the ex wife’s mother’s house, and him hauling them all into court. All captured on video from multiple angles. That kind of stuff doesn’t happen the first time ex wife doesn’t produce the kid. That’s a reaction to a pattern of behavior. You’ll be hard pressed to convince me this isnt the outcome the women wanted and planned. Yeah I do believe this was set up to happen as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 6:22:43 PM EDT
[#5]
I love all the warning shot comments. Please pull any sort of law in regards to warning shots lol
Whether ND or warning shot that would have and should have been read as an attempt to take life. That’s when green shirt grabbed the gun. The escalation was on black shirt As far as rights etc etc that’s for the legal minds but fuck off with the warning shot bs you guys are supposed to be well versed in guns and use. We all know warning shots are a no no yet all of You turn into liberals when it fits your narrative ETA: you run up on me and even pull a gun much less fire a warning shot, you should have used that time to put a round on target |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 6:22:45 PM EDT
[#6]
Just like every fucked up thing people do on video since Rodney King, we as the viewers have no idea what happened BEOFRE people started filming. Obviously things were getting sideways already and that's why the phones came out. For all we know green shirt forcibly butt raped black shirt the week prior. Maybe the guy has a history of stabbing people, maybe he was up for days on a cocaine and whiskey bender. All we have is what was filmed and the investigators have multiple statements from the witnesses. They decided to no bill him? Maybe they have more pieces of this puzzle.
Now for my unprofessional opinion: Having listened to the audio several times at high volume, I noticed a few things that some folks are missing: Green shirt guy was told to leave, refused, taunted black shirt guy, threatened to take gun from black shirt guy and kill him all while standing on black shirt guy's land. What could possibly go wrong with that strategy? He at the very least should have expected an axe handle to the knee or to have the dog turned loose on him. He should have expected the man to stand his ground on his own land. Was it a legal shoot? I think so. Bad style? Yeah. Totally. The questions I have are 1) Why was the woman in the truck not upset in the least that her man just got killed? 2) What round of 9mm did he use and where can I get it for less than the price of a used car? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 6:29:23 PM EDT
[#7]
I was just checking to see if the GD prison rape fantasy got in on page 1.
It did. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 6:42:10 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I love all the warning shot comments. Please pull any sort of law in regards to warning shots lol Whether ND or warning shot that would have and should have been read as an attempt to take life. That’s when green shirt grabbed the gun. The escalation was on black shirt As far as rights etc etc that’s for the legal minds but fuck off with the warning shot bs you guys are supposed to be well versed in guns and use. We all know warning shots are a no no yet all of You turn into liberals when it fits your narrative ETA: you run up on me and even pull a gun much less fire a warning shot, you should have used that time to put a round on target The first shot was justified. It just missed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 7:25:16 PM EDT
[#9]
I was a little surprised that the "warning shot" did not phase the current dead guy.
Smart move would have been to call the court. Then he could have stuck it to her. Now he's dead. Probably ball ammo at current prices. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 7:33:56 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It wouldve been interesting to see if he had held fire for a second and if green shirt had advanced on him again. That might change things. Afaik theres a path to the right that leads to the vehicles so hes not actually blocking his path. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That perfectly illustrates the point I was making earlier about green shirt trying to leave. Assuming that's his white truck, how is he supposed to leave without black shirt perceiving a threat because he's advancing? When you tell a guy to leave then you have to let him leave. That is the law regarding tresspassers. Black shirt effectively had him captive and then executed him. That's the proverbial smoking gun before the actual smoking gun. It wouldve been interesting to see if he had held fire for a second and if green shirt had advanced on him again. That might change things. Afaik theres a path to the right that leads to the vehicles so hes not actually blocking his path. Black shirts lawyer is going to have a hell of a time explaining that to the jury. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 7:34:41 PM EDT
[#11]
Andrew Branca's take..
 Chad Read Shooting: Evidence Supports Manslaughter, Not Justification |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 7:36:45 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Black shirts lawyer is going to have a hell of a time explaining that to the jury. It’ll be interesting regardless |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 7:40:44 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Black shirts lawyer is going to have a hell of a time explaining that to the jury. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: That perfectly illustrates the point I was making earlier about green shirt trying to leave. Assuming that's his white truck, how is he supposed to leave without black shirt perceiving a threat because he's advancing? When you tell a guy to leave then you have to let him leave. That is the law regarding tresspassers. Black shirt effectively had him captive and then executed him. That's the proverbial smoking gun before the actual smoking gun. It wouldve been interesting to see if he had held fire for a second and if green shirt had advanced on him again. That might change things. Afaik theres a path to the right that leads to the vehicles so hes not actually blocking his path. Black shirts lawyer is going to have a hell of a time explaining that to the jury. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 7:56:23 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote Historynow people gonn be mad |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:03:17 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No. We were talking about what happened right after he came out with the gun, when you said he pointed it at him, then changed your story to high ready and swept him. Black shirt is stationary and green shirt closes all of the distance, initiates chestbumps, knocks him around enough to change the direction he is facing, climbs up on the porch to have a better position, and at the very least starts jostling the firearm with his arm and potentially hand. That is what was physical before the first shot, at which point the gun had not been pointed at him yet. The shooter didn't mutually engage in chestbumping by approaching at all, he just stood his ground. The gun doesn't get pointed at the dad until later when he gets shot. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You're defining physical as waving your hands around, yelling, and walking in circles? Green shirt is 6 feet away from ex wife and black shirt for everything leading up to high ready and "leave now." Green shirt and black shirt start chest bumping after the rifle goes to low ready. Rifle was pointed at green shirt somewhere in there. Even then, it's not until black shirt takes the warning shot that green shirt actually puts hands on him. I’m not changing my story, and we’re not going to agree on this point then. If you muzzle sweep me, you point a gun at me. If the firearm were to go off at the instant the muzzle covers me, I’m going to have an extra hole or two regardless of your intent. You want to parse the word “pointed” into whether or not the firearm is shouldered and aimed. Sorry, not going to do that. FYI legally, you can catch a deadly conduct charge in Texas for pointing a firearm in someone’s direction. The statute doesn’t say how many degrees you have to be off target to qualify as not pointing, but I wouldn’t want to have to defend myself against a deadly conduct charge where I took a warning shot at someone’s feet. Texas Penal Code Sec. 22.05 Deadly Conduct (a) A person commits an offense if he recklessly engages in conduct that places another in imminent danger of serious bodily injury. (b) A person commits an offense if he knowingly discharges a firearm at or in the direction of: (1) one or more individuals; or (2) a habitation, building, or vehicle and is reckless as to whether the habitation, building, or vehicle is occupied. (c) Recklessness and danger are presumed if the actor knowingly pointed a firearm at or in the direction of another whether or not the actor believed the firearm to be loaded. (d) For purposes of this section, “building,” “habitation,” and “vehicle” have the meanings assigned those terms by Section 30.01 (Definitions). (e) An offense under Subsection (a) is a Class A misdemeanor. An offense under Subsection (b) is a felony of the third degree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:11:04 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: now people gonn be mad Quote HistoryQuoted: now people gonn be mad Naw. Branca is a rando nobody... Who cares what he thinks? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:13:28 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not changing my story, and we're not going to agree on this point then. If you muzzle sweep me, you point a gun at me. If the firearm were to go off at the instant the muzzle covers me, I'm going to have an extra hole or two regardless of your intent. You want to parse the word "pointed" into whether or not the firearm is shouldered and aimed. Sorry, not going to do that. FYI legally, you can catch a deadly conduct charge in Texas for pointing a firearm in someone's direction. The statute doesn't say how many degrees you have to be off target to qualify as not pointing, but I wouldn't want to have to defend myself against a deadly conduct charge where I took a warning shot at someone's feet. Texas Penal Code Sec. 22.05 Deadly Conduct (a) A person commits an offense if he recklessly engages in conduct that places another in imminent danger of serious bodily injury. (b) A person commits an offense if he knowingly discharges a firearm at or in the direction of: (1) one or more individuals; or (2) a habitation, building, or vehicle and is reckless as to whether the habitation, building, or vehicle is occupied. (c) Recklessness and danger are presumed if the actor knowingly pointed a firearm at or in the direction of another whether or not the actor believed the firearm to be loaded. (d) For purposes of this section, "building," "habitation," and "vehicle" have the meanings assigned those terms by Section 30.01 (Definitions). (e) An offense under Subsection (a) is a Class A misdemeanor. An offense under Subsection (b) is a felony of the third degree. youve posted this a couple of times, how does this square with 9.04? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:27:34 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not changing my story, and we're not going to agree on this point then. If you muzzle sweep me, you point a gun at me. If the firearm were to go off at the instant the muzzle covers me, I'm going to have an extra hole or two regardless of your intent. You want to parse the word "pointed" into whether or not the firearm is shouldered and aimed. Sorry, not going to do that. FYI legally, you can catch a deadly conduct charge in Texas for pointing a firearm in someone's direction. The statute doesn't say how many degrees you have to be off target to qualify as not pointing, but I wouldn't want to have to defend myself against a deadly conduct charge where I took a warning shot at someone's feet. Texas Penal Code Sec. 22.05 Deadly Conduct (a) A person commits an offense if he recklessly engages in conduct that places another in imminent danger of serious bodily injury. (b) A person commits an offense if he knowingly discharges a firearm at or in the direction of: (1) one or more individuals; or (2) a habitation, building, or vehicle and is reckless as to whether the habitation, building, or vehicle is occupied. (c) Recklessness and danger are presumed if the actor knowingly pointed a firearm at or in the direction of another whether or not the actor believed the firearm to be loaded. (d) For purposes of this section, "building," "habitation," and "vehicle" have the meanings assigned those terms by Section 30.01 (Definitions). (e) An offense under Subsection (a) is a Class A misdemeanor. An offense under Subsection (b) is a felony of the third degree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:31:34 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: now people gonn be mad They shouldn't be. It's the proper legal conclusion (imho, based on the two videos only). |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:36:16 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Naw. Branca is a rando nobody... Who cares what he thinks? I followed the Rittenhouse case closely but didn't listen to his analysis much - wasn't he second guessing the defense the whole way and saying they had blown it and Kyle was screwed though? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:37:17 PM EDT
[#21]
Maybe it's been mentioned. But perhaps it would be safer to have the parents drop off the kid. The pick up of a child sets up an adversarial conflict, on another person's property.
Now that we clearly need to treat adults like children. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:39:15 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Green Shirt was still yelling at black shirt, after the throw and during the shooting. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: That perfectly illustrates the point I was making earlier about green shirt trying to leave. Assuming that's his white truck, how is he supposed to leave without black shirt perceiving a threat because he's advancing? When you tell a guy to leave then you have to let him leave. That is the law regarding tresspassers. Black shirt effectively had him captive and then executed him. That's the proverbial smoking gun before the actual smoking gun. It wouldve been interesting to see if he had held fire for a second and if green shirt had advanced on him again. That might change things. Afaik theres a path to the right that leads to the vehicles so hes not actually blocking his path. Black shirts lawyer is going to have a hell of a time explaining that to the jury. Hot air. Green shirt takes a step into the yard toward black shirt and it's game on, and that MIGHT have happened. Black shirt fired a few seconds too soon and about 30sec too late, IMO. When he emerged from the house armed and green shirt advanced, that was probably his best opportunity to escape prosecution. Black shirt has as poor of judgement in perceiving imminent threats as he does in choosing women. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:41:54 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: now people gonn be mad Quote HistoryQuoted: now people gonn be mad Pfft, what does that guy know? The deceased was told to leave the property. After doing that you can kill an intruder no problem. Quoted: Maybe it's been mentioned. But perhaps it would be safer to have the parents drop off the kid. The pick up of a child sets up an adversarial conflict, on another person's property. Now that we clearly need to treat adults like children. A lot of custody agreements I see nowadays dictate a particular neutral drop off spot. Named and addressed grocery stores and retail stores are often used in these agreements, which I always think is funny to see a judge order the two parties to meet at walmart, but it does make sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:43:20 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryAnd there it is Eta: black shirt missed his chance to be legal |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:44:52 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You’ll be hard pressed to convince me this isnt the outcome the women wanted and planned. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm betting this is not the first time she has played fuck-fuck games during visitation times. Everybody has their cellphones out. 100% guaranteed. How do you know these things? Because green shirt’s whole rant was about the kid not being there, the ex wife keeping his son from him, him sending the cops to the ex wife’s mother’s house, and him hauling them all into court. All captured on video from multiple angles. That kind of stuff doesn’t happen the first time ex wife doesn’t produce the kid. That’s a reaction to a pattern of behavior. You’ll be hard pressed to convince me this isnt the outcome the women wanted and planned. So you think this was likely planned and deadly force was fully authorized by the events? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:54:20 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hot air. Green shirt takes a step into the yard toward black shirt and it's game on, and that MIGHT have happened. Black shirt fired a few seconds too soon and about 30sec too late, IMO. When he emerged from the house armed and green shirt advanced, that was probably his best opportunity to escape prosecution. Black shirt has as poor of judgement in perceiving imminent threats as he does in choosing women. Exactly. The situation is changing by the second. Black shirt made a poor choice at that moment in time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:55:20 PM EDT
[#27]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:57:29 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Dude, you are missing the point. Green shirt guy didn’t not have a legal right to be there at the time the confrontation escalated because he was told the kid was not there; and after that he was ordered to leave. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Bringing out a gun to threaten a guy, who had legal right to be there (visitation order), is something a grand jury will hopefully deal with. Between Texas law and human opinions, it will be interesting how this plays out. Dude, you are missing the point. Green shirt guy didn’t not have a legal right to be there at the time the confrontation escalated because he was told the kid was not there; and after that he was ordered to leave. He wasn’t told that. Why is this so hard for folks to get? Ex was supposed to bring the kids to his place. She called saying he could come get them there instead. He asked where they were and she stonewalled, as we see in he video. Kyle said the kids weren’t there AFTER he killed Chad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 8:58:57 PM EDT
[#29]
 Chad Read Shooting - Is It Murder or Self Defense - Legal Analysis - Why He Should NOT Be Charged |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 9:07:06 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Didn't watch, but from the comments it seems he disagrees with Rekieta and thinks it was homicide because of their positions when he finally shot, but if he was taking a step forward that changes his opinion (says that in one of his comments)? I followed the Rittenhouse case closely but didn't listen to his analysis much - wasn't he second guessing the defense the whole way and saying they had blown it and Kyle was screwed though? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Naw. Branca is a rando nobody... Who cares what he thinks? I followed the Rittenhouse case closely but didn't listen to his analysis much - wasn't he second guessing the defense the whole way and saying they had blown it and Kyle was screwed though? I like nick.. But from experience alone Branca is a more experienced attorney in that realm. ETA. His analysis was that Rittenhouse was a clear cut case of self defense. He may have questioned why they made kyle testify but im pretty sure every one did including rekieta ETA 2. Branca lectures at Quantico about Self Defense.. I mean think what you want of the FBI but if they consider him a SME maybe he might have a clue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 9:22:45 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I like nick.. But from experience alone Branca is a more experienced attorney in that realm. ETA. His analysis was that Rittenhouse was a clear cut case of self defense. He may have questioned why they made kyle testify but im pretty sure every one did including rekieta ETA 2. Branca lectures at Quantico about Self Defense.. I mean think what you want of the FBI but if they consider him a SME maybe he might have a clue. Rekieta definitely did browbeat the defense, right up to his statement after the fact that they had done mock juries with and without Kyle testifying and it was a very clear result. Branca slammed his closing it looks like too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 9:26:35 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, I've heard he is on top of it generally for sure. I like the idea of Kyle's Law too. I'll watch it as I'm interested in what he says on going to get the gun and coming back. Rekieta definitely did browbeat the defense, right up to his statement after the fact that they had done mock juries with and without Kyle testifying and it was a very clear result. Branca slammed his closing it looks like too. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I like nick.. But from experience alone Branca is a more experienced attorney in that realm. ETA. His analysis was that Rittenhouse was a clear cut case of self defense. He may have questioned why they made kyle testify but im pretty sure every one did including rekieta ETA 2. Branca lectures at Quantico about Self Defense.. I mean think what you want of the FBI but if they consider him a SME maybe he might have a clue. Rekieta definitely did browbeat the defense, right up to his statement after the fact that they had done mock juries with and without Kyle testifying and it was a very clear result. Branca slammed his closing it looks like too. there were certainly lots of criticisms of the defense of kyle.. But i think every one agrees that the verdict washes away any sins of the defense.. But Branca is not some rando no body... Hes got the chops and if hes not in your corner id stop and think.. As for my own personal opinion.. i think both dudes were stupid.. But if i made a body id not want to be the shooter in this vid considering the facts. Time will tell. But it doesn't seem good. Making a body and the first words afterwards are "I told yall to leave" is not the first words id say in my defense of my life.. At least  It's coming right for us! - South Park |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 9:34:25 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryThat's an overwhelmingly persuasive argument, IMO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 9:36:04 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's an overwhelmingly persuasive argument, IMO. Quote HistoryQuoted: 30 years in the business of self defense can do that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 9:39:09 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 30 years in the business of self defense can do that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 30 years in the business of self defense can do that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 9:40:44 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The only self defense going on was green shirt defending himself from the guy that introduced a weapon to a simple trespassing issue. This was murder Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: the second teal shirt guy grabbed the gun it became a self defense shoot. This was murder |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 9:41:00 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For sure. I've been waiting for him to weigh in, so thanks for posting it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: 30 years in the business of self defense can do that. Same |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 9:53:09 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So you think this was likely planned and deadly force was fully authorized by the events? https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/60053906.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm betting this is not the first time she has played fuck-fuck games during visitation times. Everybody has their cellphones out. 100% guaranteed. How do you know these things? Because green shirt’s whole rant was about the kid not being there, the ex wife keeping his son from him, him sending the cops to the ex wife’s mother’s house, and him hauling them all into court. All captured on video from multiple angles. That kind of stuff doesn’t happen the first time ex wife doesn’t produce the kid. That’s a reaction to a pattern of behavior. You’ll be hard pressed to convince me this isnt the outcome the women wanted and planned. So you think this was likely planned and deadly force was fully authorized by the events? https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/60053906.jpg The girls moved the pawns, planted the seeds and sat back and watched for justified use of deadly force. Just my intuition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:08:57 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: there were certainly lots of criticisms of the defense of kyle.. But i think every one agrees that the verdict washes away any sins of the defense.. But Branca is not some rando no body... Hes got the chops and if hes not in your corner id stop and think.. As for my own personal opinion.. i think both dudes were stupid.. But if i made a body id not want to be the shooter in this vid considering the facts. Time will tell. But it doesn't seem good. Making a body and the first words afterwards are "I told yall to leave" is not the first words id say in my defense of my life.. At least  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3RJUMm-hd0Yeah, this is the thing. I'm not familiar with the particulars of Texas law, but I understand their castle doctrine is pretty robust. Having said that, any time you kill someone in self defense, you will be expected to give a good account of why you felt it was necessary to do so. This task is much, much more complicated when the guy you shoot is unarmed. Shooter may have been within the letter of the law. I have no idea. But the issue is convincing a jury. People into guns and knives and shit know the 7 yard rule. But all the jury is going to see is a dude halfway across the yard, no knife or gun in hand, getting wasted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:11:32 PM EDT
[#40]
He is a good article by a criminal defense attorney about the shooting.
https://legalinsurrection.com/tag/chad-read/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:24:32 PM EDT
[#41]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:26:27 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What a total shitshow. To all of those saying this was a good shoot because he didn't leave immediately when asked, can you bait someone you don't like over to your yard, start an argument with them and then just tell them to leave and if they don't immediately beat it out of there just shoot them?  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:26:31 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The girls moved the pawns, planted the seeds and sat back and watched for justified use of deadly force. Just my intuition. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm betting this is not the first time she has played fuck-fuck games during visitation times. Everybody has their cellphones out. 100% guaranteed. How do you know these things? Because green shirt’s whole rant was about the kid not being there, the ex wife keeping his son from him, him sending the cops to the ex wife’s mother’s house, and him hauling them all into court. All captured on video from multiple angles. That kind of stuff doesn’t happen the first time ex wife doesn’t produce the kid. That’s a reaction to a pattern of behavior. You’ll be hard pressed to convince me this isnt the outcome the women wanted and planned. So you think this was likely planned and deadly force was fully authorized by the events? https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/60053906.jpg The girls moved the pawns, planted the seeds and sat back and watched for justified use of deadly force. Just my intuition. Interesting. Well if you could prove that, she'd be guilty of pre-meditated murder. The way you're saying it, possibly conspiracy to commit murder. I think the men involved also bear responsibility for their actions, the power of the pussy be damned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:26:51 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Naw. Branca is a rando nobody... Who cares what he thinks? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: now people gonn be mad Naw. Branca is a rando nobody... Who cares what he thinks? Rando Nobody Huh Attorney Andrew F. Branca, Esq. is in his fourth decade of practicing law, specializing in self-defense law of the United States, where he is an internationally recognized expert. Through his legal practice, Law of Self Defense LLC, Andrew helps law-abiding armed citizens make better informed, more confident, more decisive decisions in defense of themselves, their families, and their property. Andrew is an occasional Guest Instructor and subject matter expert (SME) on self-defense law at the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Academy at Quantico and the Sig Sauer Academy, has been the legal expert co-host on the Outdoor Channel’s enormously popular TV show The Best Defense. Andrew also teaches other lawyers how to argue self-defense cases as a certified instructor with the Continuing Legal Education (CLE) system in the majority of states around the country. In addition to his legal work, Andrew is also an NRA Life Member and Certified Instructor, an IDPA Charter/Life member (IDPA #13), and a Master-class competitor in multiple IDPA divisions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:33:47 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The dad didn't come there for a fight; all he wanted to do was pick up his son for their scheduled visit. He kept his distance from his ex during their discussion, except for the one small step that he took towards her, which caused her to take one small step back, which looked choreographed to me. The dad was big enough to take that carbine away from black shirt and kick his ass but he didn't. The number of people in this thread who are okay with the gunning-down of the dad who was being victimized by his ex, makes me sad. I hope that black shirt goes to prison and that karma catches up with the ex. This type of scenario isn't why we have Castle Doctrine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:34:03 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Didn't watch, but from the comments it seems he disagrees with Rekieta and thinks it was homicide because of their positions when he finally shot, but if he was taking a step forward that changes his opinion (says that in one of his comments)? I followed the Rittenhouse case closely but didn't listen to his analysis much - wasn't he second guessing the defense the whole way and saying they had blown it and Kyle was screwed though? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Naw. Branca is a rando nobody... Who cares what he thinks? I followed the Rittenhouse case closely but didn't listen to his analysis much - wasn't he second guessing the defense the whole way and saying they had blown it and Kyle was screwed though? That is kind of where I am at. He appears to shoot him from a distance after retreating. The photos make it appear unnecessary based on that. If Chad had been advancing it would probably be justified.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:41:49 PM EDT
[#47]
So Cliff notes on Branca:
Has to be an imminent threat at the moment, not seconds before. Too far away and from the video he can't see any movement forward. Basically nothing else we talked about matters much barring an imminent threat. Discusses Tueller drill, not applicable because gun is already up, would scale to 2.75' However, prior actions are context and not in his green's favor (opposite to what so many here were arguing). If he even slightly shifted weight toward black shirt it is justified because of his chest bumping and grabbing the gun and threats. May be other evidence introduced that he did, but he doesn't see it just going on the video (I do think I see it). And here's a big one - if he had shot him at the time of the warning shot it would be justified because of the threat and the grab. At that moment green was an unlawful imminent deadly threat. Murder unless the conduct of green amounts to provocation of black, if so could be just voluntary manslaughter. Not justifiable as protection of highly defensible property because black is out in the yard and green doesn't appear to try to enter the house. Is within the curtilage though. Castle doctrine applies, but only means no duty to retreat - he already had no duty to retreat anyways. Protection of mere personal property does not apply either. Not arson, robbery, or at night. Discusses the previous context at the very end - relevant to whether it is murder or voluntary homicide. Green did adequately provoke black for a reasonable jury to accept voluntary manslaughter not murder. Black provoking green is NOT mentioned as an issue. Black leaving and coming back with the gun is not mentioned anywhere as working against him in the context prior to the shooting. Not mentioned as legal provocation or otherwise relevant at all, not mentioned as being illegal to do, or a bad idea. No mention of him brandishing, pointing, warning shot (other than saying he could have shot him right then and been justified) or doing anything wrong with the gun other than killing him at the end. Reiterates it is just based on the videos and regardless of all that he said, it doesn't mean they will or have to prosecute - totally their decision whether charges are brought. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:42:00 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He is a good article by a criminal defense attorney about the shooting. https://legalinsurrection.com/tag/chad-read/  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:42:34 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Widow is telling her side on Facebook. "Chads Law" https://www.change.org/p/child-visitation-rights?recruiter=543900944&recruited_by_id=63494ba0-1d17-11e6-94d3-9b3cfd189459&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=petition_dashboard "Chad's Law" should be: Don't start none, won't be none... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2021 10:50:49 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That is kind of where I am at. He appears to shoot him from a distance after retreating. The photos make it appear unnecessary based on that. If Chad had been advancing it would probably be justified. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/249377/Screenshot_20211125-231243_YouTube_jpg-2183789.JPG Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Naw. Branca is a rando nobody... Who cares what he thinks? I followed the Rittenhouse case closely but didn't listen to his analysis much - wasn't he second guessing the defense the whole way and saying they had blown it and Kyle was screwed though? That is kind of where I am at. He appears to shoot him from a distance after retreating. The photos make it appear unnecessary based on that. If Chad had been advancing it would probably be justified. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/249377/Screenshot_20211125-231243_YouTube_jpg-2183789.JPG Black shirt’s lawyer’s statement is setting that up: https://www.everythinglubbock.com/news/local-news/kyle-carruth-attorney-makes-case-for-self-defense-after-deadly-shooting-of-chad-read/ Making the case for self-defense Carruth returned with a gun and repeated his demand that Read leave. At that point, the video depicts Read saying Carruth can go ahead and “use it, m***** f***** because G** d***** I’ll take it from you!” Carruth’s attorney, David M. Guinn with Hurley, Guinn & Singh, said the shooting was self-defense. “All Texans may lawfully brandish a firearm to protect themselves, their property and their business.” Guinn said. “When Kyle did that, Chad Read advanced on him,” Guinn said. Guinn also emphasized Read’s threat to take the gun from Carruth. “And instantaneously, he tried to take the gun away from Kyle,” Guinn said. “In doing so he was power enough to sling Kyle 180 degrees around on Kyle’s patio.” “Raising his left leg, he was continuing his advance on Kyle, threatening him and posing an immediate threat. Kyle responded,” Guinn said. “This is a justifiable homicide.” |
|
|
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.
Attached File