Reply With Quote
He was trying to protect his family and gets time. Hmm, I wonder if that hillbilly in Texas will get the same for murdering those robbers?
gets 5 to 15 years in New york case. CNN headline
He was trying to protect his family and gets time. Hmm, I wonder if that hillbilly in Texas will get the same for murdering those robbers?
Since what the hillbilly in Texas did is actually explicitly legal under Texas law, even though it was not self-defense, no, he probably won't get time.
In Texas, it actually is legal to kill burglars robbing your neighbor's house in order to keep them from getting away with the stolen property. I don't know if that is left over from the days of horse rustling or what.
Damn that is actually legal? And they say the Old West is dead.
Its legal most everywhere outside the eastern seaboard.
You enter a house thru the window, youre likely to get killed.
Interesting.
So it is legal to shoot somebody in the back who is running away from you and is of no threat to you?
The big question for the grand jury will be whether Mr. Horn acted reasonably (statutory language) under the cir stances. If Mr. Horn reasonably believed that shooting the burglars was the only way to protect his neighbor's property (and news articles indicate that the burglars were fleeing with stolen loot), then he seems to be justified under the Texas Penal Code.
Where you...
a) in my neighbors house illegally?
b) trying to flee the scene of the crime?
If both are true, at best youre in a hospital, at worst youre meeting your God.
the teenages parents should be in jail for letting him drink and go to someones house talking and the shooter should get 5 years probation and be out of jail.
Once B) is happening don't you usually want to call the police instead of administering vigilante justice.
I reside in the State of Ohio, and if you shoot an intruder in your home, and you don't want to be charged with a crime, you need to prove it was in self defense.
With that being the case, I'd say don't even think about shooting an intruder in your neighbor's home <mitigating cir stances aside>.
No, not me particularly anyway. Im sure some pacifist folks would, but I wouldnt.
You can shoot an intruder in Oregon... Something the liberals haven't been able to take away from us yet.
Quit trying to make sense and quote the law in this thread!
Well for all the vigilantes in this thread tell me why the man in New York has been sentenced to prison and yet what the Texas man did is justified.
Both are justified.
It's just that Texas still has enough common sense to have it backed by law. New York doesn't.
New York laws are ed up. That's why.
I hadnt paid attention to this story so i googled it. Spurstalk comes up 2nd! I thought that was funny.
Black man is innocent. Angry teens come to ur house and ur supposed to wait for police to show??? ing liberals
Juror: Judge and jury pressured me to convict man
RIVERHEAD, New York (AP) -- A juror who helped convict a black man of fatally shooting a white teenager said he felt pressured by other jurors and the judge to change his vote to guilty during a marathon deliberating session.
The jury convicted John White of second-degree manslaughter Saturday in the August 2006 shooting of 17-year-old Daniel Cicciaro Jr.
White, 54, remains free on bail and plans to appeal. He faces a prison term of five to 15 years.
The case drew national attention after defense attorneys argued that he feared a "lynch mob" had come to attack his family when a group of angry white teenagers gathered outside his home. The teens wanted to confront White's son.
Juror Francois Larche, who is white, said he and another juror changed their votes after enduring "a lot of psychological tactics" from fellow jurors during an unusual weekend session ordered by the judge over jurors' protests.
"It was a huge burden to bear," Larche, 46, told the New York Post in Monday's editions. He added, "I took a lot of heat."
Jury forewoman Maureen Steigerwald denied that the judge, a 12-hour deliberating session on Saturday -- the fourth day of deliberations -- or the holidays played a role in the jury's decision.
"The jury did a very careful, conscientious deliberate job," she told Newsday in Monday's editions.
Judge Barbara Kahn said the jury would have to return on Sunday if they didn't reach a decision. Larche told the Post the judge told them a mistrial would burden the families and the next jury.
"I thought about my family and the families of the other jurors," Larche said. "It was not worth it in the end."
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Contrary to prevailing opinion in this thread, I think both killings were completely unnecessary and that both men should go to prison. Unfortunately, for Mr. White, his state is not as pro-killin' as the great state of Texas.
ur on the side of the criminal. Shocker there. Just like you want us to put of the terrorists in posh hotels
I have no idea what you're talking about....
I am arguing that all of these criminals should be punished. You're the one that is arguing on behalf of the criminals.
Also, your last statement doesn't make any sense.
Last edited by Mr. Peabody; 12-30-2007 at 11:28 AM.
Because New York and Texas have very different laws about when it is justifiable to shoot somebody.
You should not even walk on someone else property, especially yelling and threatening them with more people or you might just get shot. He should not go to prison but should move out of state.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
