[UPDATED] Seeking perspective on a situation my neighbor is going through...

[Sam7sf]

Defensive display and aggravated assault are 2 very different things separated by a razor thin line, as seen here. Ofcourse I wasnt there but the facts as stated in total I'm not sure there was an imminent physical force threat to justify defensive display here but the verbal threats and stepping up would make that so close it would not be charged.

While defensive display may have been let slide here, the pointing of the weapon is the crime. Ofcourse issues like disparity in force could mitigate that, say if the kid was alone and out numbers or disabled etc, that doesnt sound like the case here. The kid and his dad versus one guy with no weapon shown. Ofcourse if the incident progressed with blows to the head the justification changes with the facts.

Aggravated assault is a typical and appropriate charge here. Is it the right charge? The final adjudication? No IMHO.

I think he will end up getting off or with a disorderly conduct deal but needs a good lawyer. Of course he could very well get the full ride felony conviction if he doesn't play cards right.


NOW HAVING FULFILLED THE REQUEST TO LIMIT DISCUSSION TO THE NARROW QUESTION FROM THE OP ....

When you carry you gotta avoid conflict. Getting identifiers like a license plate would be as far as I would go. Even then....thats what insurance is for.

Walking away from conflict IS THE ABSOLUTELY MOST DIFFICULT THING TO DO. Especially for young males and especially when your right. It always makes you FEEL like a coward and comes with adrenaline dumping into you body and makes you have to deal with all the fight or flight emotions on top of it.

Conflict avoidance isnt weakness or cowardice.

Hindsight is perfect vision ofcourse but obviously calling the police and saying the ladies husband showed up is threatening us and here are her licens plate info and we are going across the street to wait on the police so you you have t HF em hurry up before he escalates this situation would have been the best course of action.

From simple incidents to things like this to even physical altercations try your best to avoid your actions being that trigger that takes away your options and justification.

IMHO even defensive display is on shakey ground here. I hope what sounds like a good kid is allowed to learn from this incident and have a life altering felony conviction.

Thread.

 

[Axxe55]

Its generally a good idea to say as little as possible to the police. "may be used against you in a court of law...."

Exactly why a good lawyer tells you keep your yap shut until they are with you during any questioning. Once a person asserts that they want to speak with their lawyer, all questioning has to stop. IIRC that's the law.

 

[Sam7sf]

Leaving the scene when there is no injury or death is a Class B misdemeanor. This is important because Carlos The Neighbor is not a peace officer. Let's see whether or not Carlos The Neighbor can effect arrest by preventing another person from leaving the scene of an accident. That takes us to the Code of Criminal Procedure which states

Art. 14.01. OFFENSE WITHIN VIEW. (a) A peace officer or any other person, may, without a warrant, arrest an offender when the offense is committed in his presence or within his view, if the offense is one classed as a felony or as an offense against the public peace.​

No, leaving the scene isn't an offense against the public peace and because no felony was witnessed, Carlos The Neighbor cannot detain or prevent another person from leaving the scene. Strike one for Carlos The Neighbor.

Let's continue thru TPC 9 to see where Carlos The Neighbor is justified in using force. TPC 9 treats the threat of using force/deadly force the same as using force/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.​

​

Moving on, we find that

Sec. 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:​

...​

(b) The use of force against another is not justified:​

...​

(4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless:​

(A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and​

(B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor;​

So, because Carlos The Neighbor was attempting an unlawful use of force by unlawfully detaining another person, his threat (by display) of use of force or use of deadly force is not justified.

On the other hand, the state only has to prove Carlos The Neighbor

Sec. 22.01. ASSAULT. (a) A person commits an offense if the person:​

(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse;​

(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse; or​

(3) intentionally or knowingly causes physical contact with another when the person knows or should reasonably believe that the other will regard the contact as offensive or provocative.​

​

And​

Sec. 22.02. AGGRAVATED ASSAULT. (a) A person commits an offense if the person commits assault as defined in Sec. 22.01 and the person:​

(1) causes serious bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse; or​

(2) uses or exhibits a deadly weapon during the commission of the assault.​

(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree, except that the offense is a felony of the first degree if:​

(1) the actor uses a deadly weapon during the commission of the assault and causes serious bodily injury to a person whose relationship to or association with the defendant is described by Section 71.0021(b), 71.003, or 71.005, Family Code;​

​

If the prosecution wins, Carlos The Neighbor can be fined up to $10,000 and face 2 - 20 years in prison. If I was Carlos The Neighbor and my lawyer could plea down to Disorderly Conduct without the deadly weapon enhancement, I'd take that in a heartbeat.

​

Also thread.

 

[Sam7sf]

This is some of the most bone headed stuff I have read.

 

[toddnjoyce]

George Zimmerman got off with self defense.

He initiated everything.

Different state, different laws, took it to trial and won on the gamble. Don't forget Joe Horn. Both men killed the only other person who could tell a different tale.

 

[deemus]

Exactly why a good lawyer tells you keep your yap shut until they are with you during any questioning. Once a person asserts that they want to speak with their lawyer, all questioning has to stop. IIRC that's the law.

 

[Axxe55]

This is some of the most bone headed stuff I have read.

Might keep someone else from making the same mistakes.

There are many times when we might think we are doing the right thing, and not realize we are really breaking the law.

 

[Sam7sf]

Might keep someone else from making the same mistakes.

There are many times when we might think we are doing the right thing, and not realize we are really breaking the law.

There’s a lot I could say but won’t out of respect for the op. I still could have just not posted anything but part of learning is pointing out stupid choices. I don’t say that to be a dick but the kid made a stupid choice and didn’t have his temper in check.

People can talk about all the woulda coulda shoulda they want. Doesn’t change what the current situation is or the decisions that led up to it.

It sounds like a crappy deal as everyone involved sounded unable to think clearly. Because people are so insane is why I have a cam on my trucks windshield.

 

[Axxe55]

There’s a lot I could say but won’t out of respect for the op. I still could have just not posted anything but part of learning is pointing out stupid choices. I don’t say that to be a dick but the kid made a stupid choice and didn’t have his temper in check.

People can talk about all the woulda coulda shoulda they want. Doesn’t change what the current situation is or the decisions that led up to it.

It sounds like a crappy deal as everyone involved sounded unable to think clearly. Because people are so insane is why I have a cam on my trucks windshield.

Hindsight is always 20/20 I have learned the hard way. Made lots of stupid mistakes when I was much younger, and glad I learned from them and luckily didn't end up dead or in prison.

 

[1911'S 4 Me]

It will all depend on the Grand Jury if he is charged.

 

[Axxe55]

It will all depend on the Grand Jury if he is charged.

And a lot of that will depend on how agressive the DA or prosecutor wants to pursue the case.

 

[Sam7sf]

Hindsight is always 20/20 I have learned the hard way. Made lots of stupid mistakes when I was much younger, and glad I learned from them and luckily didn't end up dead or in prison.

Those days are over. I can relate but those days of a cop or deputy or other parties involved shaking hands or being neighborly are over. Plenty of people will hit and run now. Chasing someone makes you an aggressor and confuses others.

What could have been a “shit, my bad, are you ok”? Situation, turned into someone facing charges.

 

[Sam7sf]

It will all depend on the Grand Jury if he is charged.

Probably will.

 

[Axxe55]

Those days are over. I can relate but those days of a cop or deputy or other parties involved shaking hands or being neighborly are over. Plenty of people will hit and run now. Chasing someone makes you an aggressor and confuses others.

What could have been a “shit, my bad, are you ok”? Situation, turned into someone facing charges.

Pretty much the way I see it as well.

 

[candcallen]

So you think that yelling I'm going to kick your and walking towards them. Should not be taken as a serious threat. If so then that's the kind thinking that will get you hurt.

And pulling your weapon will get you a prison sentence.

Words and a couple steps do not justify a deadly force response. You do not pull a gun cause some blow hard wants to fight. Not counting obvious disparities in force which were not present here.

You are justified in using equal force. Full stop. You dont have to take a hit but you also cant just elevate to the deadly force threat without justification.

Just like Stand your ground laws arent magic talisman, neither is your weapon. You assume great liability when you carry. Also, like this kid found out, when you decide to present it. Not being justified in elevating the level of force will cause you to severely phuck yourself.

The totality of the circumstances here really hurt any claims of this being justified.

I suggest you reevaluate your understanding of legal principles involved.

 

[rotor]

Words and a couple steps do not justify a deadly force response. You do not pull a gun cause some blow hard wants to fight. Not counting obvious disparities in force which were not present here.

First, kid did not use deadly force. He pulled his gun when deadly force was threatened on him. The threat of someone whooping your *ss is the threat of deadly force.

You are justified in using equal force. Full stop. You dont have to take a hit but you also cant just elevate to the deadly force threat without justification.

As you said, you don't have to take a hit. Taking a hit is deadly force if you believe that your life could be endangered by a hit. It all comes down to if you think that your life would be in danger (or severe bodily harm) if you would be hit. We all know that people die from these kind of fights. The young man did not initiate a fight.

If someone was coming at me with the intention of beating me I would at a minimum show my gun to stop his deadly force on me and at a maximum use my gun.

 

[Sam7sf]

He chased someone and was pissed. He didn’t muddy the water. He took a giant dump in it.

He’s going to have a hard time playing the victim/the guy that defending himself; was the only option from something that probably happens a lot to others without everything that happened.

 

[jwhistler]

The chasing and stopping the car. Was over when the husband shows up and started acting aggressively verbally threatening to kick ass. The young man was wrong for the chase and the husband is wrong for acting like a fool and is lucky he didn't get shot.

 

[candcallen]

First, kid did not use deadly force. He pulled his gun when deadly force was threatened on him. The threat of someone whooping your *ss is the threat of deadly force.


As you said, you don't have to take a hit. Taking a hit is deadly force if you believe that your life could be endangered by a hit. It all comes down to if you think that your life would be in danger (or severe bodily harm) if you would be hit. We all know that people die from these kind of fights. The young man did not initiate a fight.

If someone was coming at me with the intention of beating me I would at a minimum show my gun to stop his deadly force on me and at a maximum use my gun.

Lol

 

[Wildcat Diva]

It’s one long chain of events. Can’t separate it out. Once they chased her down, they created a situation that they can’t get a clean self defense charge out of.