Grand Jury Clears Texan in the Killing of 2 Burglars

they were shot in the back, you must be facing someone to threaten them.

if those 2 had been shot in the front, i might feel a little different, but they weren't.

i also don't see any corroboration to the 2 burglars threatening him either.
who else besides the murderer saw them enter his yard and threaten him?

i would lie through my teeth too to keep me out of jail.

is that pre-meditation or what.

 

Quoted from the article:

Texas law known as the "castle doctrine" allows people to use deadly force to protect themselves if it is reasonable to believe they are in mortal danger. In limited circumstances, people also can use deadly force to protect their neighbor's property; for example, if a homeowner asks a neighbor to watch over his property while he's out of town. It's not clear whether the neighbor whose home was burglarized asked Horn to watch over his house.

 

How the hell can you feel in mortal danger when you are:
1. Inside your house
2. Holding a 12 gauge shotgun (the other 2 were unarmed)
3. You have them on the run with their back turned to you

Can you please answer?
You can hear it on the phone that he was pretty set at killing these two. He just walked out his house, and created a confrontation. I would like to know who the hell the prosecutor is to screw up this case so bad!

 

I think he got off by "watching his neighbor's property".

 

he tells 911 he's going to kill them.

hangs up the phone and kills them, then calls 911 back:

this guys a putz and deserves to be in jail.

 

Was it worth it?

By the way, one of the dead has an 8-month old to feed. Who knows why he had to resort to stealing. Maybe could not find work. If they were that bad of criminals you would think they at least would have weapons? But what do I know. I value human life far more than material junk that you can't really take with you anyways.

 

Another quote from the article:

Under Texas law, people may use deadly force to protect their own property or to stop arson, burglary, robbery, theft or criminal mischief at night.

 

these guys were Columbian man, wouldn't surprise me one bit that old bastard ends up murdered himself. really dumb what he did, really dumb.

 

Really? Do we now need to interview a thief to ascertain the reason for his criminal behavior? All accounts state that both criminals were unemployed illegal aliens. Oh, sorry, you're unemployed with an eight month old? Here, please steal my stuff too! Make it quick before immigration gets here.

I suspect that you only value life more than someone else's stuff.

 

Where they were from, what color they were or what gender they were is really irrelevant in my opinion. To me it boils down to poor judgement on the part of the murderer 61yr old. He should have not shot them. The fact that they had turned their back to him proves that they were scared to death and on the run. Had the old guy not squeezed the trigger he would have been heralded as a hero, as the two would be on the run and the loot would stay behind.

 

You are correct. I value human life far more than my stuff or someone else's for that matter. Having a clear mind and heart outweighs living with a guilty conscience any second of the day. But since you seem to lack conscience + guilt I say you and I would probably not agree on many issues, so I rather leave it at that.

 

The thieves having a 8 month at argument and was stealing food defense does not work here.

The grand jury is following the law. You guys are off base. To say that if you were on the Grand Jury that you would disregard the law and convict the man on your own made up law is ridiculous.

The man was in the right. He was justified according to the Grand Jury in the state of Texas. Justice has prevailed.

The grand jury had “conducted a thorough review of the evidence and testimony. You have not. You guys are arm-chair quarterbacking and don't know what you are talking about.

Justice has prevailed.

What constitutes justice? WE CAN'T DISAGREE ABOUT WHAT THE LAW IS, although we may disagree about how it should be interpreted and enforced. The law is what is written in the law books of a particular place or country. The law may not be right -- it may be totally unjust. But it's still the law. Of course, in most cases the people who write the law think that the law is just.

BUT UNLIKE JUSTICE, NO ONE CAN ARGUE ABOUT WHAT THE LAW IS in a country like the United States where laws are "clearly" defined.


Justice has prevailed.

 

I think most of you are missing the point.

No, I wouldn't kill someone over property, but according to the LAW, does this man deserve to go to jail? NO

Here is a link to the breakdown of the exact law in question: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80R/billtext/html/SB00378I.htm

Now, if you read closely it states that:
A person is justified in using deadly force against another: (B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

And he technically prevented them from committing the robbery, didn't he? It doesn't matter that the guys were running away or were not endangering his life. The law basically states that deadly force is an acceptable means to prevent the commision of a robbery. So, the justice system worked in my eyes. Some of you don't agree with the decision, but the job of our jutice system is to uphold the law whether the law is a ridiculous one or not. Just because you don't agree with the decision doesn't mean it wasn't the right one to make in the eyes of the law.....

 

Good point firegirl. I didn't know that the Law in Texas stated that. I know that it doesn't in most states, but since the law applies to Texas, you have a good point. What he did was still wrong, but legally right i guess.

However, i do have one question on that. He did tell the cops that he was going to kill them. So was it prevention of robbery or premedidated murder?

 

You are correct, the justice system worked.

 

i couldn't agree more, but this was a burglary, and i don't see burglary in that quote, no one was in danger at all.
unless you believe what the murderer says.

 

The Grand Jury has spoken. It does not matter what you think or I think. The Grand Jury does not make up the law. The man is innocent …he did nothing wrong.

 

Just because the man is found innocent doesn't mean he did nothing wrong.

 

OJ Simpson was found not guilty as well. Do you think he is innocent?

 

He did nothing illegal. I still think it's wrong but what I think is wrong doesn't really matter in this case.