Posted on 11/28/2021 1:50:53 AM PST by House Atreides
Today I’d like to take a look at a shooting out of Lubbock TX that is suddenly getting a great deal of news and social media coverage—the shooting death of Chad Read by William Carruth.
As is so often the case, there is, unfortunately, a lot of confusion about how to understand the use-of-force legal issues in this case, with a great deal of misunderstanding of both the relevant law and how it should reasonably apply to the facts of this case. In addition, there’s a great deal of weight being put on factors that are, really, irrelevant to a proper use-of-force legal analysis.
So, hopefully, we can bring some clarity of understanding to this event, at least in the use-of-force law context.
OVERVIEW OF THE FACTS & VIDEO First, a quick overview of the facts of the Chad Read shooting. It appears that Read was upset because his ex-wife, at the Carruth home, had failed to deliver their son to Read for his scheduled custody transfer. While in the front yard, and later front porch, of the Carruth home, Read shouted and postured angrily at his ex-wife. Carruth ordered the angry Read off his property, a command with which Read declined to comply.
Carruth entered his home and emerged a moment later back onto the front porch carrying a carbine (a pistol-caliber long gun), presumably to attempt to compel Read to comply with his command to leave the property….
…Given that everything discussed in this analysis is based on … two videos, I’ll embed them right here, so as to avoid confusion as to what I’ll be referring to….”
(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...
The late looming doofus at someone else’s house, chest bumping the owner, refusing to leave and grabbing his gun.
This. I wonder what the real size of the smaller man is? I have seen the "little man syndrome" acted out over and over again.
One fellow I knew who was significantly short ended up getting himself killed because he was drunk and belligerent at a bar. The bartender told him to leave and he said he was coming back with his gun, which he did. Bartender shot him first.
I liked him, but he would be aggressive and wouldn't back down. I guess he felt like he had to prove something.
True but a prosecutor may well ask why the mom didn’t comply with a court ordered custody transfer that would have caused the conflict and shooting to have been avoided. It’s like a gang invading a house and one of them gets shot. The other gang members could be charged with murder or manslaughter and not the home owner.
The prosecutor needs to dig a little deeper.
In West Texas, you go on a man’s property and start in angrily on his woman, you to have to die. It has always been thus and will forever be.
Oh, because it looked to me like both doofuses were hotheads, though I would have regarded the smaller guy as the hotter headed of the two.
Guy standing there while someone gets up in his face with a gun was relatively calm if you ask me.
How much of a hot head would you be if someone was keeping your son away from you?
“I have seen the “little man syndrome” acted out over and over again.“
Just as common is the looming doofus syndrome. Big guys who deliberately use size disparity to try to intimidate and bully. Works well in high school. And sometimes, in West Texas, that’s a good way to get your lamp blowed out.
By both parties.
I ask myself…….would I have done the same thing under the same circumstances?
Going outside with a weapon to confront someone who is “bitching” and not vandalizing, or harming anyone is stupid and asking for trouble.
The shooter wanted the man off his property.
Ok, I have trespassers all the time on my property. Hunters, campers, etc. should I shoot them? Or call the State Police if they fail to leave?
None have refused to leave so far.
I carry a concealed weapon myself and if I’m home and on my land I open carry because of bears, Elk, wolves, etc.
I don’t unholster my weapon at the sight of trespassers.
Geeeez.
Call the cops, give them time to arrive.
Let the angry man carry on with his grievances.
2nd Degree Murder with the option for the Jury to take it down to Manslaughter.
Did the shooter even call the police himself?
Yeah, yeah, property owner rights and 2nd Amendment……I get it, I’m for it, but trespassing and complaining is not a capital offense in this country.
What was he gonna bully him in to doing? Producing the man's son? Pretty sure that was the mom controlling that.
I think this is a male head butting show in front of the female, and I think that was the motivating factor for the new man feeling he had to prove himself, which he did.
In the absence of this law stuff, she would be massively impressed with his manliness.
I suspect that is why the shooter didn’t call the police
Excellent analysis of the shooting, showing it was not justified.
I do too. It would make him look "weak" in front of the woman.
Whatever happens, the conniving wife wins.
The ex is dead, and if current husband goes to prison she gets the assets and can start finding another fool.
Or he knew the father was right about the mother withholding the child.
So far the Lubbock Police said it’s justified. The law said the looming doofus was wrong. He just wanted to push people around. He found someone meaner than him.
Direct quote when he saw the gun,
“Do it,” Read can be heard saying. “You better F****** use it M*****F******.”
He got his wish.
Not according to the author of the article........
This was an obvious setup and am betting this wasn’t the first altercation over visitation rights. The shooter and wife were ready with a witness at the door, a phone for recording and a gun. They knew what his reaction would be when they told him he couldn’t see his son, it was completely staged and they baited him into aggressive behavior OR they did it intentionally to kill him, which is exactly what happened.
The key is going to be an investigation of previous issues and I bet this wasn’t the first time he went to get his kid and was denied visitation. They probably were in contempt of court orders.
Re: 24 - I think use of the word “woman” is a bit kind.
She sounds like trash, who withheld her child seeing his father.
One of the few good deeds I take real pride in is talking with a co-worker who had started to date a woman (who I knew indirectly along with her ex-spouse) who had kids. Good job, nice house, etc. My friend was so excited that they would be able to travel and do a lot together. The father had custody of the kids and the mother saw them a couple of times over the summer.
“Dig deeper” I advised my friend. “If she does not have custody there’s a reason why. Find that out”.
Turns out that not only did she not have custody, her parental rights were terminated. That takes a bit of doing, actually a lot of doing to get a TPR order. The visits over the summer were with a social worker present and only because the ex-husband wanted the kids to have some interaction with their mom. To get the TPR he agreed to forgo collecting several thousands of child support.
But she was a nut. Would not produce kids for visitation, arrested for contempt when she continued to not produce kids for visitation, harassment, simple assault, etc. Amazed she kept her job through all that.
My friend ended up dating her for just a couple of weeks and broke up when he found out more about her situation. Woman talked about having kids on the second date. Really pressuring - on the second date! Thank goodness my friend dodged that bullet. He later married, and moved out of state and has a nice family. I last heard the women was married again and divorced again (no kids), and is with a boyfriend doing some unsavory stuff with him on the Internet. Her kids are grown and have very little to do with her.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.