Strange "Defense of Others" Shooting in TX....

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TexasRifleman

Moderator Emeritus
Joined
Feb 16, 2003
Messages
18,301
Location
Ft. Worth
http://www.nbc5i.com/news/11456374/detail.html?dl=headlineclick

A little faith in the Grand Jury system restored by recognizing the defense of others right and placing blame where it belonged.

Not sure about shooting at him while driving away, but the Grand Jury thought it was OK. Perhaps with the view that he believed he was stopping a rapist from hurting someone else?


FORT WORTH, Texas -- A husband who killed his wife's alleged lover after finding them together escaped a murder charge from a grand jury, which instead indicted the wife for causing the shooting by claiming she was being raped.

Tracy Roberson, 35, was charged Thursday with manslaughter in the death of Devin LaSalle, who police said Roberson invited to her suburban Arlington house in December with a text message that read, "Hi friend, come see me please! I need to feel your warm embrace!"

But prosecutors said when Darrell Roberson arrived home from a card game in Dallas and found his wife -- clad in only a robe and underwear -- with LaSalle outside in a pickup truck, Tracy Roberson told her husband she was being raped.

Police said Darrell Roberson fired four shots as LaSalle tried to drive away, with one striking him in the head.

A Tarrant County grand jury declined to indict Darrell Roberson, 38, on a murder charge.

Tracy Roberson, 35, faces two to 20 years if convicted.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
This is strange.

I know in NY this would have been illegal - the (alleged) crime was done, no longer anything to prevent. I think it's good that the wife is being held responsible. I don't know how I feel about the husband being let off completely but then again I'm from NY - maybe shooting people immediately after the (alleged) commission of a crime is legal in TX.

I find myself thinking that in most jurisdictions it would not be possible / feasible to try them both (him for the act, her for the instigation). Is this really the case?

Thanks for posting this - hopefully there will be some good discussion.

Lastly, the moral of this story is: Always make sure it's ok with your spouse for you to be sleeping around. That way no one needs to get shot.
 
Mek42 - This was a case of 'jury nullification'.

They attempted to charge him with murder, but the grand jury declined to indict him.

The man's lawyer likely played up the 'rape' angle, the husband's not entirely sane defense of her, etc...

This is clearly a case of us not knowing all the facts.
 
Mek42 - This was a case of 'jury nullification'.

They attempted to charge him with murder, but the grand jury declined to indict him.

The man's lawyer likely played up the 'rape' angle, the husband's not entirely sane defense of her, etc...

This is clearly a case of us not knowing all the facts.
Click to expand...

This was a Grand Jury. His lawyer had little to do with him being "no billed".

He is lucky he was in Tarrant County and not Travis County. Our D.A. is famous for taking a case that has been "no billed" and shopping it to Grand Jury after Grand Jury until he gets an indictment.:banghead:

The Grand Jury gets it right in this case.
 
This one is a tough call. If somebody "raped" my wife I would not shoot them, the threat is passed. I would, however call the cops with his license plate number and let it come out in the wash. After it was discovered that the "rape" was in fact a tryst I would merely divorce her, take all my things and leave, after telling her family and mine why I was leaving. In the circumstance, knowing what I know about it (what the article tells me), I cannot say the shooter did wrong. I would just go about resolving this differently.
 
Legal question for those that might know.

I assume the DA charged the wife as well for the Grand Jury to indict her correct? Or could the Grand Jury return an indictment they were not even asked for?

If that then are the DA's actions here competent?

Why charge the guy at all if his actions were "reasonable" (believing your wife when she is screaming rape)?

Why not go directly to the source and charge her only?

Maybe he has to be charged since he pulled the trigger and the system worked like it should.

Anyone know enough Texas law to say?
 
They attempted to charge him with murder, but the grand jury declined to indict him.
Click to expand...

The only problem here is that double jeopardy doesn't apply at the Grand Jury level and the case can be sent back to the Grand Jury at some point in the future. The Grand Jury is really just part of the decision process as to whether or not there is sufficient evidence to continue with prosecution, but is not a trial. So the husband could still be tried at some point in the future, especially given there is no limit on murder statutes.

As noted by hoji, the husband's lawyer had little or more likely nothing to do with the no bill since the grand jury isn't about defense, but about prosecution.
 
Would a police officer in the same situation, ie: coming upon a rape in progress, be allowed to shoot to stop a fleeing violent felon?
 
If his wife said she was being raped, why would he have any reason to doubt her? You're allowed to shoot people who are attempting to commit rape.
 
Why charge the guy at all if his actions were "reasonable" (believing your wife when she is screaming rape)?
Click to expand...

It is fairly common for even a remotely controversial shooting to go the grand jury. IIRC, all of the shootings involving CHLs have gone to the grand jury, even though almost all of those were no-billed. Beyond that I couldn't say.
 
Double Naught Spy is correct. In Texas (don't know about other places) the district attorney can request an indictment as many times as he or she wants.
In 1975 I was on a grand jury in Houston and we did not indict a young woman who had stabbed another woman to death. I didn't agree with the decision and talked to Carol Vance who was DA at the time. He assured me that she would get indicted by one of the other GJ's.
It ain't over till it's over.
 
If I remember right when I got my CCW we were told it is legal to shoot a fleeing felon. If you just saw someone kill someone you could shoot them if they were fleeing. If your wife said she was just raped you could shoot the fleeing rapist. She is the one at fault. It is to protect the public. Just like a police officer. At least in my State that is the law of the land.
 
I say he should have at least been tried.

While I can completely empathize with the shooter, but the guy wasn't an immediate threat anymore. Heck, the only reason he had to think the man ever was a threat was 2nd hand testimony.

I probably would have done the same thing, but I would have known the whole time that I might go to jail if it turned out i was shooting an innocent man who proved no threat.
 
If his wife said she was being raped, why would he have any reason to doubt her? You're allowed to shoot people who are attempting to commit rape.
Click to expand...

You said "allowed to shoot people who are attempting to commit rape."

Well here is the thing. I am not sure if it is the same in TX, or your state. When I first got my CCW in AZ it was made clear that at no time AFTER the BG made the effort to leave/retreat could one legally pursue and continue to use deadly force.

Catching said BG in the act, start middle or end, is the KEY. You can shoot in the event of protecting/stopping such a crime as rape. Not after the crime was committed, BG got in his truck and started to drive off.
 
Technically wouldnt the "good samaritan" laws apply if you try kill someone to save someone else?

But in this case, it seems to be a premeditated murder set up by the guys wife. Have hubby come home, see the lover in the drive way, tell hubby while dressed in rather interesting lingerie "he raped me" and let hubby kill lover.
Feels like she intended to get rid of the now ex lover via "death by husband" and get rid of the husband by getting him sent off to the pokey for 25 to life.
 
Weird story here.. However, I would like to say this.. If someone really did rape my wife, and were running to the car as I was comming home, I would no doubt shoot them if I had a chance.
 
Well let's think about this, the "BG" was in no hurry (based on the accounts) to leave. He was already in his truck when the husband got home. Wife was dressed in a manner normally "associated with sex", not chores. There was no mention of her mannerisms, emotional state or appearance other then the clothing she was wearing. Something smells fishy from the get go. I understand he must have trusted his wife, probably didn't think much beyond the word rape, but seriously.....the "scene" (as described) isn't one I would associate with a recent rape.
 
Heck, the only reason he had to think the man ever was a threat was 2nd hand testimony.
Click to expand...

If my wife said someone just raped her, I would tend to take her word.

When I first got my CCW in AZ it was made clear that at no time AFTER the BG made the effort to leave/retreat could one legally pursue and continue to use deadly force.
Click to expand...

I'll ask again, are police allowed to shoot a fleeing rapist?

Not to mention that this is in Texas, where, if the people who have posted before are to be believed, that it is legal under certain circumstances to shoot to protect property... Got to love Texas
 
Did anybody mention the woman had been having an affair of sorts with the deceased, prior to his deceasing?

She was one quick thinking witch, gotta give her that. Happily, it didn't exactly work out the way she wanted.

The night before, she'd sent a text message to the soon to be dead lover stating that she wanted "to feel your warm embrace", or words to that effect. At least that's what I read in the paper the other day. And we all know, the paper's never wrong:evil:

Glad she's going to spend time in the pen.
 
Wife was dressed in a manner normally "associated with sex", not chores.
Click to expand...

You normally have your wife up after midnight dressed for chores?

Dude, he was coming home from a poker game, what the hell would you expect her to be wearing in the middle of the night?

the "scene" (as described) isn't one I would associate with a recent rape.
Click to expand...

Again, its the middle of the night and she is outside in a vehicle with some stranger, yelling rape when you drive up.

You'd stop to go over the "scene"? You ever heard of kidnappings? Secondary crime scenes?
 
I reread the article, I originally inturpretted something different. Assuming she was in the truck with the deceased, then yes there is something to the story the wife gave. I would have shot him also.

I'll ask again, are police allowed to shoot a fleeing rapist?
Click to expand...

Police are allowed to use deadly force on an escaping suspect, who was fleeing upon interuption of the violent crime, if they feel it will prevent futher victims. However, "you, me and the other guy" are not LEO, are you?
 
If somebody "raped" my wife I would not shoot them, the threat is passed. I would, however call the cops with his license plate number
Click to expand...

The Canuck,

Supposedly, Michael Dukakis lost an election with an answer like that in a debate with Bush Sr.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

george29
  • Locked
Jury VS Grand Jury
Replies
10
Views
723
chilie
C
K
  • Locked
Follow up: Wife convicted after husband fatally shoots lover
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Don Gwinn
D
T
  • Locked
Man Shoots Wife's Lover, Wife gets charged
2 3
Replies
54
Views
4K
george29
george29
O
  • Locked
No Indictment in Shooting Prompts Concern
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
johnster999
J
D
  • Locked
(TX) Burglar Shot In Church
Replies
7
Views
598
Mal H
Mal H
Back
Top