cycleguy2300
TGT Addict
While opening door with gun in hand is stupid, it is not illegal and does not constitute use of deadly force.
Sec. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.
Since there was no use of deadly force, shooter does not get (A) exemption.
Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force;
1) Talk to the actual complainant, and not 3rd party who was witness to nothing. It was like a game of telephone.
2) Stand outside door a few minutes listening and see if he gets any probable cause or at least reasonable suspicion a crime is in progress.
3) Also, absent a warrant, the order to open the door was unlawful and unconstitutional.
I respectfully, but vehemently disagree.
Holding a handgun when opening the door constitutes a threat of deadly force.
That he was in his own house has VERY little to do with the deputy's decision making process., the deceased knew or should have known it was LE.
Had there been time and space, sure the deputy could have trued to communicate more and see what the guy was going to do, but he didnt have time or space to do that.
The "he could have...", "I would have done...", also has nothing to do with the justification of when the subject opened the door with gun in hand he was a deadly threat to the deputy so long as the deputy had a legal right to be there (called for a possible FV is legal right).
Unless there is something that happened before or during that I am not seeing, I believe courts will ultimately find this to be a justifiable homicide.
Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk