Is this Self Defense?

Is this Self Defense

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 21.4%

  • No

    Votes: 7 50.0%

  • Potato Salad

    Votes: 4 28.6%
  • Total voters
    14
fordman84 said:
In Texas you are allowed to defend property, even your car.
My question is if it were after 3:15, then wouldn't this shooting be during the commission of a crime (not legally handing over a child per courts orders)? Seems self-defense goes out the window if you are actively committing a crime, but not sure the details of the house and the parents and all that.

This Carruth guy may have a legal self defense claim, but he needs his ass whooped. Little man hiding behind a gun, what a pussy. Civil case probably cleans him out.
Click to expand...
He probably loses the civil suit, but never pays a dime of it. That’s how these things usually work.
 
Mofo said:
This will be political in about... 30 more seconds also. 40-something pages, most of this has already been said.
Click to expand...
That’s fine. Some of us are having the discussion on this board for the first time. Not even trying to make it political…..I can see both sides here.
 
fordman84 said:
You got it.
Click to expand...
and I agree with you....Carruth brought out the gun to intimidate Read, who was dealing with his ex wife, who was not cooperating.

not sure why Carruth felt it necessary to inject him self into the situation if it wasn't something planned.
 
Orlando_Eagles said:
That’s fine. Some of us are having the discussion on this board for the first time. Not even trying to make it political…..I can see both sides here.
Click to expand...
I'm not in the PF so I haven't had the discussion.

I don't know why it would be political though.
 
Illustrious Potentate said:
But I will say if someone has a gun trying to get you to leave, you probably shouldn’t taunt them with “you better fucking use it”
Click to expand...
Yeah. Seems like stepping to the street and calling the cops would have been a better option.
 
Orlando_Eagles said:
That’s fine. Some of us are having the discussion on this board for the first time. Not even trying to make it political…..I can see both sides here.
Click to expand...
Okay. Go for it. :pop2:
 
fordman84 said:
In Texas you are allowed to defend property, even your car.
My question is if it were after 3:15, then wouldn't this shooting be during the commission of a crime (not legally handing over a child per courts orders)? Seems self-defense goes out the window if you are actively committing a crime, but not sure the details of the house and the parents and all that.

This Carruth guy may have a legal self defense claim, but he needs his ass whooped. Little man hiding behind a gun, what a pussy. Civil case probably cleans him out.
Click to expand...
I figured most surely that property was allowed to be defended.

It’s an interesting point about “in commission of a crime”. I’m not sure how the parameters of that work. It’s maybe fair to say that the kid was due for Dad at 3:15 (even if that is an odd time). But, I also don’t know shit from shit and just because the guy said 3:15 I don’t know if that is so.

At any rate….I can see the self defense holding up criminally. Civil liability is likely to be a bitch for the shooter.
 
Orlando_Eagles said:
I figured most surely that property was allowed to be defended.

It’s an interesting point about “in commission of a crime”. I’m not sure how the parameters of that work. It’s maybe fair to say that the kid was due for Dad at 3:15 (even if that is an odd time). But, I also don’t know shit from shit and just because the guy said 3:15 I don’t know if that is so.

At any rate….I can see the self defense holding up criminally. Civil liability is likely to be a bitch for the shooter.
Click to expand...
but like the Rittenhouse case, this dude injected himself into a situation. If he hadn't decided to be the hero, no one would have been shot and killed, right?
 
How to settle a dispute

1649693067311.png
 
I see both sides. Both were in the right and in the wrong at different times. If I was on the jury I’d probably find him guilty of murder - because at no time does it appear the shooter or anyone at the home’s lives were in danger - but I’m simply basing that on the early info in the story.

I’m also a big backer of stay off peoples property when they don’t want you there. He could have called the cops to assist w the pick-up.
 
ill said:
but like the Rittenhouse case, this dude injected himself into a situation. If he hadn't decided to be the hero, no one would have been shot and killed, right?
Click to expand...
That argument cuts two ways. No one would have been killed if dead hothead had just gone to the street.
 
williewilliejuan said:
That argument cuts two ways. No one would have been killed if dead hothead had just gone to the street.
Click to expand...
but it didn't involve this Carruth guy...it was just an argument between the ex's.

if he was really concerned, call the police and let them deal with it.

instead he brings out a gun and makes threats, elevating the whole thing to "oh shit, there's a gun involved".

without the gun, no one gets killed.
 
This situation is a Chappelle's Show "Real Movie" remake of the fight scene between Craig and Deebo in "Friday".
 
ill said:
but it didn't involve this Carruth guy...it was just an argument between the ex's.

if he was really concerned, call the police and let them deal with it.

instead he brings out a gun and makes threats, elevating the whole thing to "oh shit, there's a gun involved".

without the gun, no one gets killed.
Click to expand...
I think both actors here were shitty and should have handled things differently. No one needed to die that day. Dead guy was much bigger and was belligerent. I can see why the shooter felt the need to defend himself. He was at his own home. That said, at the time he shot him he was posing no risk. At the end of the day, all legalities aside, a man died just because he wanted to see his son. That sucks.
 
williewilliejuan said:
I think both actors here were shitty and should have handled things differently. No one needed to die that day. Dead guy was much bigger and was belligerent. I can see why the shooter felt the need to defend himself. He was at his own home. That said, at the time he shot him he was posing no risk. At the end of the day, all legalities aside, a man died just because he wanted to see his son. That sucks.
Click to expand...
I don't know how emotionally driven the dead father was though. That can certainly add to his belligerent approach, especially if this isn't the first time he has had this problem with his ex wife.

so was the exwife with the kid at Carruth's house and Read was there to pick up his kid?
 
ill said:
but like the Rittenhouse case, this dude injected himself into a situation. If he hadn't decided to be the hero, no one would have been shot and killed, right?
Click to expand...
A fair point. For me it changes some when it’s his property. He’s not really inserting himself akin to Rittenhouse inserting himself into that situation IMO.

Another thing…Rittenhouse’s case didn’t happen in TX. Makes it all different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top