Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Texas shooting case heats up


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Texas shooting case heats up Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Texas shooting case heats up - 12/4/2007 8:21:08 PM   
cyberdude611


Posts: 2596
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline 		This guy, Joseph Horn, in a city near Houston witnessed robbers breaking into his neighbors house. While on the phone with 911, he takes a shotgun, goes outside, and shows the two robbers down as they were trying to get away. Horn's lawyer is claiming that Horn was only protecting his neighbor's property.

Racial tensions though are now rising because the two robbers happen to be black and a demonstration nearly turned ugly Monday as civil rights activists planned a march demanding Horn be prosecuted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_OBGbly29Y

Here is a part of the transcript from the 911 call:
Here is part of the 911 call:
Dispatcher: "I want you to listen to me carefully, OK?"
Horn: "Yes?"
Dispatcher: "I got ultras coming out there. I don't want you to go outside that house. And I don't want you to have that gun in your hand when those officers are poking around out there."
Horn: "I understand that, OK, but I have a right to protect myself too, sir, and you understand that. And the laws have been changed in this country since September the First and you know it and I know it."
Dispatcher: "I understand."
Horn: "I have a right to protect myself ..."
Dispatcher: "I'm ..."
Horn: "And a shotgun is a legal weapon, it's not an illegal weapon."
Dispatcher: "No, it's not, I'm not saying that, I'm just not wanting you to ..."
Horn: "OK, he's coming out the window right now, I gotta go, buddy. I'm sorry, but he's coming out the window. "
Dispatcher: "No, don't, don't go out the door, Mister Horn. Mister Horn..."
Horn: "They just stole something, I'm going out to look for 'em, I'm sorry, I ain't letting them get away with this ----. They stole something, they got a bag of stuff. I'm doing it!"
Dispatcher: "Mister, do not go outside the house."
Horn: "I'm sorry, this ain't right, buddy."
Dispatcher: "You gonna get yourself shot if you go outside that house with a gun, I don't care what you think."
Horn: "You wanna make a bet?"
Dispatcher: "Stay in the house."
Horn: "There, one of them's getting away!
Dispatcher: "That's alright, property's not something worth killing someone over. OK? Don't go out the house, don't be shooting nobody. I know you're pissed and you're frustrated but don't do it." 
Dispatcher: "Which way are they going?"
Horn: "I can't ... I'm going outside. I'll find out."
Dispatcher: "I don't want you going outside, Mister..."
Horn: "Well, here it goes buddy, you hear the shotgun clicking and I'm going."
Dispatcher: "Don't go outside."
Shots can be heard on the tape....
Horn: "Get the law over here quick. I've now, get, one of them's in the front yard over there, he's down, he almost run down the street. I had no choice. They came in the front yard with me, man, I had no choice! ... Get somebody over here quick, man."
Dispatcher: "Mister Horn, are you out there right now?"
Horn: "No, I am inside the house, I went back in the house. Man, they come right in my yard, I didn't know what the --- they was gonna do, I shot 'em, OK?"
Dispatcher: "Did you shoot somebody?
Horn: "Yes, I did, the cops are here right now."
Dispatcher: "Where are you right now?"
Horn: "I'm inside the house. ..."
Dispatcher: "Mister Horn, put that gun down before you shoot an officer of mine. I've got several officers out there without uniforms on."
Horn: "I am in the front yard right now. I am ..."
Dispatcher: "Put that gun down! There's officers out there without uniforms on. Do not shoot anybody else, do you understand me? I've got police out there..."
Horn: "I understand, I understand. I am out in the front yard waving my hand right now."
Dispatcher: "You don't have a gun with you, do you?
Horn: "No, no, no."
Dispatcher: "You see a uniformed officer? Now lay down on the ground and don't do nothing else."
Yelling is heard.
Dispatcher: "Lay down on the ground, Mister Horn. Do what the officers tell you to do right now."
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/4/2007 9:21:58 PM   
EPGAH


Posts: 500
Joined: 12/25/2006
Status: offline 		This efficiently ties together 3 of my earlier posts:
#1.) Vigilantes are proscuted MUCH more vigorously than the criminals they fight!
#2.) Death penalty doesn't HAVE to be expensive!
#3.) If you are against a minority criminal, then God help you, because corporeal entities won't!

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/4/2007 9:55:49 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		Wait,....before knowing,EPGAH`s post will include illegals, and/or Mexicans.An educated guess... 

< Message edited by Owner59 -- 12/4/2007 10:00:13 PM >

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/4/2007 10:01:38 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		      Don't mess with Texas...

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 12:19:37 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		I saw that on the news tonight.
They're going to have a real tough time indicting him as these two jamokes were in the commission of a felony when he shot them.
And if they do the jury will be loaded with people like me who will vote "Not Guilty."
No matter what your race is if you're going to rob someone's house there's a chance that you'll be shot dead.
It's real simple, if you don't want to get shot don't try to rob people's houses! How's that for "civil rights?"

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 5:20:15 AM   
sambamanslilgirl


Posts: 10926
Joined: 2/5/2007
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		problem is - the law states, Horn had the right to shoot the would-be thieves IF they were robbing his home - that's the keyword to the entire case.  however since he shot the two men (and it doesn't matter to me if they were black, white, hispanic, etc - crime is crime no matter the colour) on the neighbor's property, county prosecutors have to decide whether he was justified or not according to the law. if not - he could be facing jail time.

_____________________________

...2011 - year of the fabulous rock star life ...and i do it so well...


...announcing Mr. & Mrs. British Petrol ...yeah, marrying into oil is slick business...

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 7:19:50 AM   
GoddessMine


Posts: 250
Joined: 9/27/2007
Status: offline 		Interesting insight from an old Stanford/Berkeley law professor of Mine (source = www.poplicks.com)
===========================================================================

"While there is no evidence (yet) of racial motivations, the protests have quickly divided along color lines. Dejesus and Ortiz, the deceased, are black and, from what I can tell from photos, Horn appears to be white.

As you can see from the photo of the protest/counter-protest below (taken out to fit this post), white men with confederate flag tattoos confronted and attempted to drown out Black Panther Party leader Quanell X and a group of largely black protesters. Some national reactions have also veered in similar directions, with Horn supporters praising him for taking on "hoodlums."
Quanell X believes Horn should be charged with murder. Horn's supporters are praising him as the neighbor of the year.

There's obviously a big moral debate over whether Horn was right to shoot the two alleged burglars. There's also the legal question of whether Horn would be protected from civil and criminal action by claiming self-defense. I'm going to leave those aside from now.

Here's the real kicker: According to my basic legal research of Texas criminal laws, there would be absolutely no criminal case against Horn ... had the burglary taken place at night.

(Thanks to Kristen for pointing out that the shooting took place at 2 pm.)

Here are the relevant passages of the Texas Penal Code:



§ 9.43. Protection of Third Person's Property

A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:

(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or

(2) the actor reasonably believes that:

(A) the third person has requested his protection of the land or property;

(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third person's land or property; or

(C) the third person whose land or property he uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent, or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.


*

§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property

A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.


Horn clearly saw two men taking property from his neighbor. He believed deadly force was necessary to prevent them from fleeing after immediately committing burglary. He didn't have other means to stop them. Depending on his relationship with the neighbor, he probably can successfully claim that he had the duty to protect his neighbor's property.

Thus, Horn was legally justified in fatally shooting the next-door burglars except for the fact that the alleged crime took place in the middle of the day. Had the alleged crime and shooting taken place several hours later, there would be no debate as to Horn's legal innocence.

In my opinion, that's the craziest part of this whole story.

It seems that those who are outraged at Horn should really be angry at the Texas legislature for empowering Horn (and future neighbors) to serve as judge, jury, and executioner. "

< Message edited by GoddessMine -- 12/5/2007 7:22:16 AM >

_____________________________

Pleasure of the Text? Pleasure of the Goddess, more like it.

(in reply to sambamanslilgirl)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 8:55:01 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		Let me take a wild guess here.
I bet those two lowlifes were,....."turning their lives around."
We'll hear phrases like, "overcame great difficulties.", "recently started school," "recently got a job", "doing well on probation,"
"were becoming "assets" to the community," "recently got his G.E.D.," "recently got off of welfare," "recently.....fill in the blank."
Of course they'll be painted with the broad and colorfull brush of,........."Victimhood."
"They had such great......."potential!"
"Recently got to know his five illegitimate children who've been supported by the state of Texas."
"Recently completed a drug/alchohol treatment program."
"Recently kicked a 10 year heroin addiction."
"Recently got out of a homeless shelter."
I'm trying to guess all the things that the ACLU will be saying about these two "martyrs."
"Scholorship to be set up in their names."
"Will be remembered as......"

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to GoddessMine)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 9:47:52 AM   
Alumbrado


Posts: 5560
Status: offline 		It really doesn't matter what old common law, outdated local statutes, or millions of TV and movie scripts might say, there is no right to kill merely over property anywhere inside the US.  That stuff went out with the rest of the Reagan Era.



Garner v. Tennessee:

"...Petitioners and appellant have not persuaded us that shooting nondangerous fleeing suspects is so vital as to outweigh the suspect's interest in his own life.
The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable...
 
... A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead.The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against such fleeing suspects."

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=471&invol=1



If the police aren't allowed to do it, guess what... neither is Mr. Horn.

Now whether Bubba the DA  is willing to risk his political career on upholding the Constitution is another story.

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 11:29:31 AM   
Archer


Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline 		BZZZZZZZZZZZ Wrong answer.

In the state of TX you do have the right to use deadly force under specific circumstances to protect property.
Betwen the hours of dusk and dawn when you have a reasonable belief that you will not see the property ever again.

specificly 2B

§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.  A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1)  if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41;  and
(2)  when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A)  to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;  or
(B)  to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property;  and

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.002.00.000009.00.htm

edited: noticed the link was a federal appeal case, might have some bearing but circut curts of appeals ruleings have limits as well.
The ruleing in TN for police officers would be different than the ruling for a private citizen elsewhere.
Protecting your property and even protecting someone elses property as a citizen has a different standard than the police who have no official duty to protect your personal property.



< Message edited by Archer -- 12/5/2007 12:00:11 PM >

(in reply to Alumbrado)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 12:43:40 PM   
Alumbrado


Posts: 5560
Status: offline 		Texas has been exempt from the US Constitution and Supreme Court rulings since when?  Oh yeah, that's right... they aren't.

Many states still have laws on the books that were nullified by Garner, Lawrence,  or other rulings declaring them unconstitutional. Virgina kept their slavery/chattel laws on the books until the 1970s IIRC.

(And if you are going to trot out the tired old 'states rights' argument to support slavery, or murder, don't bother, its a non-starter   Every resident of Texas who is a US citizen is protected by the 13th Amendment.  And big surprise, they are equally protected by the key words in Garner...."outweigh the suspect's interest in his own life".  In order to outweigh that Constitutionally protected interest, you are going to have to do better than 'They looked at my iPod funny'.)


quote:

  edited: noticed the link was a federal appeal case, might have some bearing but circut curts of appeals ruleings have limits as well.
The ruleing in TN for police officers would be different than the ruling for a private citizen elsewhere.
Protecting your property and even protecting someone elses property as a citizen has a different standard than the police who have no official duty to protect your personal property.


Again, Garner was not about the right of a police officer to shoot anyone, it was about the right of all US citizens to not be executed without a trial over mere property, where no imminent danger is shown.
That right exists no matter who is pulling the trigger.


And if you cannot tell the difference between the US Supreme Court in one of its milestone rulings on individual rights, and a circuit court ruling about police procedure  ( and who knows where you came up with the bizarre notion that the police have no duty to stop a property crime in progress ),  pardon me if I ignore the rest of your conjectures.

< Message edited by Alumbrado -- 12/5/2007 1:35:04 PM >

(in reply to Archer)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 12:54:17 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		Hmmm now if he had only used a taser...Just wondering how he knew for sure what they were doing there? Who knows they could of been movers or handy men...I mean how did he know for sure they were thieves.

Why the heck not shoot in the legs if they would not stop or went for a gun or came at him...sounds to me like he wanted to kill them.
He does I'm afraid deserve a manslaughter charge... The police said they were on the way and to stay in the house.

I hate thieves but do they really deserve to be shot when they are not threating?

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 12/5/2007 1:02:00 PM >

(in reply to Alumbrado)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 12:58:27 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		When seconds count the police will be there in minutes.

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 1:15:09 PM   
Alumbrado


Posts: 5560
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

This guy, Joseph Horn, in a city near Houston witnessed robbers breaking into his neighbors house. While on the phone with 911, he takes a shotgun, goes outside, and shows the two robbers down as they were trying to get away. Horn's lawyer is claiming that Horn was only protecting his neighbor's property....



Actually, it seems that Horn's lawyer, who one might presume knows a little bit more about the reality of Texas laws than some people here, is quite wisely distancing his client from property defense claims and is sticking with the tried and true legally sound basis for a such shooting.

"But according to Tom Lambright, Horn's attorney and a friend for more than four decades, he's the one in need now. "He just needs everyone to know he's not a villain, he's not a bad guy," Lambright said.

He went on to say that Horn voluntarily gave an extensive video statement to police immediately following the shooting.

Horn was not taken into custody after the shooting. A Harris County grand jury will decide if charges are to be filed.

Lambright says Horn acted in complete and total self defense and has nothing to hide."

http://wcbstv.com/national/joe.horn.shoots.2.570499.html


(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 1:37:12 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		Sometimes there is just a moral difference between acting within the law of Texas and within the law of common since and humanity.

There are people who given the chance will rejoice in killing. Those boys were wrong but just think people… what if they were your sons.

I just wish they could keep race out of it…I’m sure that ass would have shot white, red, black or yellow…he did not care he just got a kick out of killing.

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 12/5/2007 1:39:22 PM >

(in reply to Alumbrado)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 2:42:15 PM   
thornhappy


Posts: 8596
Joined: 12/16/2006
Status: offline 		Seems like one very good reason for the dispatcher's actions is to simply keep Horn from being mistaken for a criminal with a gun, and being shot by mistake.

thornhappy

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 3:32:23 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline 		What's that motto: "Don't mess with Texas"?



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to thornhappy)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 4:44:47 PM   
Archer


Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline 		Nice job of the misquote.
My allussion was to this ruleing
The 1981 decision Warren v. District of Columbia, for example, held that it is a “fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.”
They have NO obligation to protect your individual property, they have a duty to protect the general peace and to arrest those who break the law.But they don't have any obligation to protect your individual life or your individual property.
BTW the condecenssion is unwarranted, a prime reason lawyers are so hated.





(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 4:46:53 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

What's that motto: "Don't mess with Texas"?




They seem fairly capable of messing with Texas all on their own.  If I remember correctly, 4 of the top 10 most polluted cities in the United States are in Texas.

I know I am not the one messing with Texas.

Sinergy


_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Texas shooting case heats up - 12/5/2007 4:57:08 PM   
Archer


Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline 		The difference I was pointing to is simple the police shot the man trying to flee when he was attempting an arrest
Horn had an entirelyt diifferent motive the proterction of a 3rd parties property (as mentioned above not a duty of the police according to Warren v DC)
Since the goals were different the law would most liekly be different to since the goal was to protect property vs to arrest.


(in reply to Archer)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Texas shooting case heats up Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.266