Posted on 11/16/2007 4:59:15 PM PST by Daffynition
That's not going to play well with a jury either. At the very least this guy's going to have some really big legal bills.
I understand your hypotheticals; however, how many stories of plumbers being shot by neighbors do we hear about? And how many stories of landlords reclaiming their homes by breaking into them because they didn’t have a key do we hear about? I cannot recall even one. Ask me how many stories I hear of scum breaking the law.....endless.
We can come up w/ hypotheticals for EVERYTHING and therefore, not do anything about anything because “something” might happen.
Your cite of the Texas Penal Code includes the term “at nighttime.” According to the reports I’m seeing, this took place at 2:00 in the afternoon.
You said the Sheriff locked the door; therefore, he had the key. How did the Sheriff get the key? The deadbeat tenant happily handed it over?
All you have is an old guy who thinks someone has commited a crime. He has little evidence to go on. But he doesn't care. He takes out his trusty shotgun and kills both of them.
I suppose that proves they weren't all that dangerous ~ couple of young bucks, taken out by an old guy.
I think he's going to go to jail as a multiple murderer. Unfortunately they will not execute him, but the history of his type is such that you can almost count on him killing someone else in prison.
Again, depends who’s on the jury. The operator said HE was going to get shot, he said “I don’t think so”, in his own words of course. Besides, if there is a law in Texas that covers defending a neighbors property and he was given the task to defend the neighbors property AND knew the law, it may not be such a long shot.
You have to have a tungston or titanium bellhousing on the lock to keep out the pros.
He said on tape that he doesn’t know the neighbors who live in the house that was broken into, so any assertion that the neighbor asked him to protect their property is not going anywhere in court.
The history of his type? Does this “very violent offender” have a record? Violence usually doesn’t start when someone is in their 70’s, they usually get the taste of “blood” when they’re much younger.
Regarding “plumber shot”, it appears 335 times on the net. “carpenter shot” appears 1,140.
First, Wentworth was probably ambushed by the media. He didn’t know much if anything about the case, and so couldn’t comment cogently. Second, the recently enacted “castle doctrine” is not the relevant law here. The castle doctrine makes it very , very difficult to proceed against someone legally for using deadly force under certain circumstances. The codger, however, will probably be defended on the basis of law that existed before the castle doctrine. Whether he gets indicted depends on facts and politics. If indicted, whether he gets convicted will depend mainly on facts (because it is Pasadena).
Oh yes you can...
IMO the Operator was implying that if the officers arrived and saw him standing there with the shotgun, they would possibly shoot him in the “fog of war”
However a good defense attorney could use this statement to bolster the notion that the shooter was in fear for his life.
Also From the tape:
“I understand that, but I have a right to protect myself too”
He does not state, “I have the right to defend my neighbors property”
From what I’ve seen,after skimming two threads,most of the
folks that have a problem with this are from the north,,,
Where they don’t have the same “Rights”...;0)
“911: “Nope, don’t do that. Ain’t no property worth shooting somebody over, OK?” “
Not....”No sir, that is illegal and you will be arrested” or anything to that fact. Just property not worth shooting someone over. Found that a tad strange.
I have to go listen to the entire 911 call, I am going by the information posted here......
He had to start sometime. 70s as good an age as any. He’s acting out finally and killed two guys ~ we still don’t know if they had actually commited a crime (the public record is thin on this one).
Correct sir, in the tape the caller states “broad daylight”
He has little evidence to go on. But he doesn’t care.
The codger had more evidence for what he did than you do for your commments.
I’m sure it does, but what are the facts in those cases. I cannot recall any story about a plumber or carpenter being shot because someone thought they were burglarizing a home.
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.