This.The Grand Jury deliberations in the Joe Horn case remain sealed, but two very important factors have been made public: (1) Horn's attorney has stated that he intended to argue justification on the basis of self defense; and (2) a law enforcement officer who witnessed the shooting said that the actions of the decedents were such that Horn could or would have reasonably believed that they were attacking him.
The 911 call indicates that Horn believed that he would be justified under the section of the Texas code that states that deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent the taking of someone else's moveable, tangible property, but there is a big question about whether Horn could present evidence showing that he had in fact been asked to do so by his neighbor; that's a prerequsite under the law.
Nothing to do with the case at hand, but the Horn incident is widely
misunderstood and has been put forth to promote some very erroneous conclusions.
The burglars were actually advancing toward Mr. Horn, though it is debatable whether they were attacking, or just planning to flee past him. He stood in, or along, the way of their escape.
FWIW, I have experienced burglars fleeing in my general direction, after a homeowner turned loose her shotgun at them, so I think I have an idea how Mr. Horn felt at that moment in time. Had they kept running toward my position,
upon seeing me, I might well have fired. I caught the one who surrendered, and the other two changed course and kept running. The fastest runner was notable because I thought he had long hair; actually, he had medium-length hair. The homeowner's swarm of birdshot had hit his forehead, and partially scalped him; his scalp, flapping in the breeze, looked like long hair in the darkness.