hope never to deal with anything like this

[JWarren]

It's interesting that the motives and character of Glass are so easily impuned, but the Homeowner seems to be getting a free ride as if everything he reported was factual...

I'm not giving the homeowner a free ride. I am withholding judgement until I know more.


But the undisputed fact remain the same. Glass was in his house.


As I've said, I don't buy the explaination that a THIRD PARTY said as to why he would be there.

I never said I easily impuned his character-- but I don't buy a story just because someone is selling it-- especially someone that wasn't there. My extrapolation of Glass has to do with the unexplained and undisputed fact of being there. Couple that with a idiotic explaination by a third party.

Then consider that we DO have an explaination from someone who was there. Unless I have a reason to disbelieve the person in his OWN home and minding his own business, he DOES get more credibility with me at this point.


-- John

 

[gunsmith]

I have made a similar mistake

I was tipsy and opened the wrong door in my apt building.
(they all look alike) I knew immediately I was in the wrong door, I didn't even step inside.

Doesn't Texas law allow you to shoot to recover property?
(I thought it did)

 

[SHOOT1SAM]

A sad case all around.

What everyone who seems to be missing as to how it the world Glass could NOT have immediately known he was not in his own house, is the fact that he didn't even live in the town. He had been staying at his sister's house:

"Glass, a sophomore at Angelo State University who grew up on his family's farm, had been staying at his sister's house on Autumn Evening the night he died.

That house is painted white with blue trim and is on the right side of the cul-de-sac. Lemes' house is also white with blue trim and is on the right side of another cul-de-sac, Autumn Star. One home is directly behind the other."

I can see it happening; an angry homeowner with a gun, presumably yelling, confronts him; a college kid panics and runs.

Unless Glass was dragging off another person, I don't think one can argue the fact that chasing him outside of the house was idiotic.

Sam

 

[joab]

I maintain that the homeowner made a tactical error by pursuing the intruder after he had left the house.

No matter which side you fall on the homeowners right to shoot, you can not easily dismiss this.
In almost any scenario that you or I can think of pursuing an unknown person into an undefined situation is risky at best
If his purpose was to protect his family he did that when the BG left the house
And we all know that many times criminals do not work alone

It's interesting that the motives and character of Glass are so easily impuned, but the Homeowner seems to be getting a free ride as if everything he reported was factual...

In Florida, where I grew up, the states attornies were instructed to liberally construe the law in favor of the homeowner in cases like this (before we actually had that codified into law)
I liked the theory so much that I have incorporated it into my daily life and code of conduct
If it is later found that this young man was having a clandestine interlude with the homeowners daughter I may change my view on the case.

Until then the mistake, innocent though it may, be was the kids
As far as entering the home

 

[ace1001]

The Moral here is that if someone has a gun pointed AT you, SLOWLY do what he says while repeating "Don't shoot, I'm not armed." Even if you think this is all a mistake. Ace

 

[WeedWhacker]

As seen in the Kinney/McKay/Floyd case, there is almost always more to the story than is first told...

 

[Clipper]

No one seems to be interested in the fact that the kid was shot from the front (as the article mentions the shot in the chest), which may add credence to the claim that the kid lunged at him. I don't see any evidence whether or not the kid was under the influence of anything, and we all know that being drunk or whacked-out makes logic a moot point. We'll likely never get the whole story, unless this goes to trial, because there's no sensational gun-bashing to be published if the shooting is found to be justified...

 

[joab]

No one seems to be interested in the fact that the kid was shot from the front (as the article mentions the shot in the chest), which may add credence to the claim that the kid lunged at him.

When I was 17 my mother caught a guy peeping in her window
When I caught up with him after about two blocks he turned towards me and I tackled him while running full speed, I was about to start beating on him when my father pulled up in his truck

Some friends of mine who were standing in their yard at the time saw the whole thing and said that the guy was surrendering
To this day I would honestly say that he had turned and was preparing to attack me

Possibly because we were running full speed ahead, his sudden turn back with his hands outstretched looked like a lunge to my adrenaline stoked brain

It is possible that the kid stopped to surrender, possibly thinking that he was safer doing so in the street, and the homeowner took it as a lunge at the time

It's also possible that the kid lunged at the homeowner

 

[Blackbeard]

When I first moved to Houston, I saw a story on the news where an apt dweller had heard someone messing around in his truck. He looked out the window, saw someone trying to steal his truck, and promptly blew the thief's head off with a 30.06. (It turned out to be a repo-man) He was no-billed by the Grand Jury, as he didn't break any laws.

I wonder, if he had missed, and the repo man returned fire and killed the owner, would he be justified as well? After all, the repo man didn't break any laws, either, did he?

 

[spocahp anar]

Question: Do citizens still haver a right to make a Citizen's Arrest and and detain those suspected of criminal action until Police can arrive?

That being said noone knows what happened except for 2 people and one of them is dead. Let the law sort it out; if he has wounds in his back then his story is false and he may be charged with murder. Texas law allows for you to kill someone for stealing your property, and the criminal doesn't have to be in the yard to be justified.

About ten years ago a man was repossesing a vehicle and the owner saw him came out and shot at the truck as the man was driving away. The man runs into a ditch down the street where he dies from his bullet wound. Owner was found innocent even though he hadn't made payments on the vehicle and shot the man in the back while driving away. I even believe the owner went back inside and went to bed without reporting the incident to police. The vehicle was found in the morning.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The laws of Texas are pretty clear. If someone is ON YOUR PROPERTY AFTER DARK without your permission, they are taking their life in their hands.

If you shoot someone in Texas just because they are on your property after dark without your permission, you are putting YOUR life and liberty in the hands of the grand jury.

I'm not familiar with the story you repeated above; but I do know that Texas grand juries have indicted in similar situations in the past and you could easily find yourself in the same situation if you aren't able to justify why you felt there was an immediate threat of death or serious injury.