Posted on 12/27/2008 5:23:50 AM PST by marktwain
A woman's 80-year-old grandfather fatally shot her estranged husband after he tried to take their two children from the grandparents' house, Conroe police said Saturday.
==========cut======================
According to police, Boudreaux's estranged wife and children have been living with her grandparents for about five months. When Boudreaux arrived Friday and tried to take the children, the grandfather intervened and ordered him to leave. Boudreaux refused, pushing the man out of the way, the statement said. The grandfather then allegedly retrieved a revolver from another room and placed it in his back pocket before again advising Boudreaux, who was aware the older man had a gun, to leave, police said.
As the two left the home out to the driveway, Boudreaux again pushed the older man and allegedly struck him in the chest area where he recently had a pacemaker inserted, police said. Fearing for his life, police said the older man then allegedly shot Boudreaux once, killing him.
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
It’s hard to make a determination without having more information. Someone on the Houston Chronicle’s website posted an article from another site, stating that the police had received multiple calls to the residence before, but did not state the reason. More than likely, the grandfather will be protected under the Castle Doctrine. I don’t think you can determine what type of father he was by looking at his myspace page. I don’t know many people who come out and say “I’m a drug user and I’m abusive”. In addition to that, if you did go by their myspace pages, it seems that it was the father who was not over the mother. She’s his top friend and there are pictures of her all over his page (yet mrsboudreaux’s comments seem to dispute that). My father was a deadbeat dad who never paid child support to my mother, yet we still had to go on visitations with him until we were old enough to say we didn’t want to anymore. My cousin is twice divorced and has a son by each of his ex-wives. He’s a great father and has amicable visitation agreements with each of them. Without all of the facts, it’s hard to say what was going on in that family.
He wasn't trying to just see his kids, he was trying to take them away from the grandfather's house. I realize that the courts sometimes make a mistake in giving custody to the mother, but this guy sounds like a hothead with a bad attitude. Or maybe there was bad blood between the father and grandfather.
In any case a younger man has no justifiable excuse for attacking an 80 YO man with a recent pacemaker implant. You may have had a bad experience in a custody case yourself, and if so I can understand your attitude. But unless I knew more details about the situation I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that the father was justified in what he tried to do.
And self defense would be the last thing on your mind. You want the alleged perp dead. You may pay later in court. Be careful who you deem worthy of your ire.
Because it takes time for bullets to have an effect, guns can in fact be emptied before the the person being shot even starts to fall down. A revolver can be emptied in less than a second, though most people are not that fast.
The father had already left the house and the grandfather had followed him out and killed him in the driveway.
So who was the hothead with the bad attitude?
If it had been me, because I was at her Father’s home, when he said “go” I would have went.
If I could get the police to accompany me I may have returned.
The estranged husband, in my opinion, was in the wrong and judging by his actions was probably a bully.
If I had been the woman’s Father I would not have followed the guy out the door. Gun in my back pocket or not.
Granted that there is more to the story than was reported.
“why does a father have to fight anyone to get to see his kids? The real tragedy is that the dad died to see his children....the court and friend of the court system is sooo broken it is beyond belief”
He wasn’t trying to “see” his kids, he was trying to “Take” his kids.
And anyman that would strike an 80 year old man in the chest after recently having a pacemaker installed surgically probably isn’t the kind of guy you want kidnapping your children.
Thanks, I didn’t click the link for the rest of the story.
But “shot him once, killing him” means he pumped more ammo into a dead man. I guess it pays to be sure.
Kind of an odd thing to say. Where do you get your info? Story says that he was shot once in the arm and once in the torso, doesn't say where the third hit was nor the caliber. You shoot until the threat is no longer a threat. A hit in the arm with a .22 may not slow a lot of folks down. Not making any comment on this story.
Malarkey. If I'm ever in a position where I am forced to fire once, you can bet I'm going to follow up with other shots until I am sure the attacker is DOWN.
The asshat father was trespassing on private property, and was told to leave. He refused, instigated violence, and was rightfully shot (thankfully dead, so he can't sue). Good for grandpa.
“If I ever use my revolver in self-defense, I’ll keep shooting until all my bullets are gone.”
Multiple gunshots do not indicate that something more than self defense was involved. Self defense often involves multiple gunshots. That is just reality.
Multiple gunshot wounds? The article says he shot him once.
I know all that but...If the perception of a threat is wrong and the shootee is dead with multiple gunshot wounds the shooter is in deep chocolate.
Even when the threat is real. Why empty your weapon? It seems like a vulnerable position to be in if the perp has a friend lurking in the shadows.
Would you be happy that a violent person was just out of the house, or would you follow them to their car and make sure they were on their way out of there? If this person was trying to take the children, shoving and punching an 80 year old man, I wouldn’t have been happy to have him just out the front door. Plus, you don’t know if he was going to his car to get a gun himself.
No, the man was right to follow him to his car and make sure he was on his way.
~~~~~~~~~~~
You assume far too much! More than likely, Judith Anne was trained as I am: do not draw, point your weapon at another human -- or fire -- unless/until the situation is "in the gravest extreme". When the situation has reached the point that you must fire, continue to do so until the threat is eliminated.
It would take an almost incomprehensible threat to cause me to fire at another human; but once that threshold was passed, the combat training would kick in, and there would be no stopping until the situation was rendered safe.
You, OTOH, have obviously never had serious threat response/responsibility training -- or you do not consider your life or the life of your loved ones to be worth defending.
Re-read the story. The grandfather was escorting him off the property when he turned and attacked. I'd have shot the bastard, too.
You know nothing about me. If you can't control your emotions while in control of a firearm please don't use one.
Not according to any of my firearms instructors.
The report of pushing the grandfather out of the way is a one sided opinion. you added “punching”.
There was a legal agreement from both parents where the father had every legal right to take the kids for a visit. The grandfather and the mother violated that legal agreement.
Still, it is a difficult thing to do, and must be trained for. The instinctive thing is to focus on the threat that has been trying to kill you.
And now you’re adding the father “attacked” the grandfather??
You were there to see all of this?
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.