Skip to comments.Houston Taqueria Shooting: Legally Justified Killing or Simply an Execution?
Posted on 01/11/2023 10:17:36 AM PST by absalom01
The question now, of course, is whether the shooter’s use of deadly defensive force to stop Washington’s armed robbery was justified on the legal merits.
The answer? Yes, maybe, and almost certainly not.
Confused yet? Let’s clarify.
Shooting someone dead is, of course, normally a crime. Under Texas law, and the law of every other state, however, the use of deadly force upon another might be legally justified, and not a crime, if it meets the conditions for deadly force defense of persons—meaning either defense of self or defense of others. ...
Importantly, the legal conditions for justification must be met for each individual use of deadly force in the encounter—meaning, in this case, for each round fired by the shooter–and that’s where we arrive at the “yes, maybe, and almost certainly not” nature of whether this shooting is lawful.
The bottom line, of the nine rounds fired by the shooter at Washington, the first four were almost certainly legally justified, the second four may be legally justified, and the ninth and final shot almost certainly was not justified, based upon the only evidence currently available to us, which is the surveillance video of the encounter.
For purposes of this commentary and legal analysis, I’ll be addressing the shooter’s use of force as three distinct use of force events, each needing their own legal justification in order to be lawful.
Use-of-Force #1: The first four shots fired, roughly from the start of the video to 0:10 seconds.
Use-of-Force #2: The second four shots fired, roughly from 0:10 to 0:14 seconds in the video.
Use-of-Force #3: The ninth and final shot fired at about 0:16 seconds in the video.
(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...
There is much more at the link, and anyone who regularly and legally carries a firearm for self defense will find much of value in Mr. Branca's dispassionate discussion adn analysis.
“based upon the only evidence currently available to us, which is the surveillance video of the encounter”
Does the video have audio? How do we know the criminal didn’t speak some imminent threat that prompted the ninth shot?
Put me on the jury and it will be a hung jury at the least.
I’ve seen the video...he shot the guy about a half dozen times. From what I saw one shot would have been justified...maybe even two. But it seemed to me that the guy went a bit overboard.
The police won’t protect us; the judges side with criminals.
It’s time to quit the pettifoggery and stop nitpicking each round fired. If the scumbag deserved to be shot, it doesn’t really matter how many times he got shot.
If you’re an armed citizen, I urge you to be judicious with your shooting. Consider legal ramifications ...
If you’re an armed citizen, and you have engaged in a defensive shooting, and the assholes at the DA’s office have charged you with something ...
You want me to be on your jury.
Give the guy a break ....he ran out of ammunition.😎
Obvious to me that the two black guys on the floor under the table felt threatened. I wouldn’t convict the guy.
There is audio, though it’s not in sync.
Branca addresses a lot of “what if’s” about the whole shooting scenario.
For myself, I would not want to be having to defend any of the last 5 shots, though it’s easy after the fact to be an armchair tactician.
Important to think about one’s own rules of engagement before “the flag flies”, in any event. Much to be learned here.
Knowing what you currently know, if you were on the grand jury would you indict?
Knowing what you currently know, if you were on the petit jury would you convict?
Doesn’t matter. The scrote got 6 years in prison for an armed robbery murder and got released. Went back and did the same thing again. Ran into someone older, smarter and harder and got his lamp blowed out.
Find me a Texas jury without at least one person unwilling to convict. And it might not be that old white geezer from the ranch. It might be a hardworking Mexican immigrant who hates a thief and terrorist. It might be a woman who saw that terrified waitress run towards the shooter when she got a chance to get to safety behind him. That not guilty juror is out there.
“He was a good boy. A very good boy” -his jomama
I don’t think a Texas grand jury will indict, not even Harris County.
In a city that will almost always seat a liberal jury and has a Soros-backed DA, I think the most appropriate classification is Simple Legally Justified Execution.
Why do you think that? Was it unfair? How many shots do you think are allowed? (Hint, the law has no such number)
“I’ve seen the video...he shot the guy about a half dozen times. From what I saw one shot would have been justified...maybe even two. But it seemed to me that the guy went a bit overboard.”
It is not the number of shots that is important. The shooter was not going to wait to see if the perp turned and started shooting him and others. He took out an immediate threat. He didn’t have to wait or count his shots.
Abuse of a corpse.
“From what I saw one shot would have been justified”
So shoot one time, see if they guy shoots back, then OK for shot number 2? Don’t be so naive, you shoot until you are 100% sure your life is not longer in danger. Every shot was justified, unfortunately in Houston with a Soros DA that last shot looks bad.
Very good write up on the legal issues involved.
As I stated on another thread, "reassess after each shot" at which you scoffed. Texas law is clear.
Correct plus the fact that shooting a perp puts the shooter under extreme stress. He should not be expected to stop and think “Yeah, I incapacitated him, that’s enough.”
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.