Houston Father Kills Faux Intruder

Status
Not open for further replies.
Picture Father leaving on a stretcher? He was a big guy! Did he need a gun against a teen? So many unanswered questions. Dad will have a lawyer when he exits Hospital.

Seems to me, the questions will remain unanswered. Till the natural process takes place.

Police examine physical evidence. GSR will show Father fired shot? Can not take the GSR test, unless Dad is charged with a crime?

Hard to charge Dad, no evidence? His House, His Daughter, His gun?

Unless some one talks to Police? Which the Father, or Daughter are not obliged to do? Good luck Mr. Police Chief!
 
I have trouble believing pure defense-of-another motives of the husband in the Robertson case, and the father in this illicit teen romance case.

I don't think it takes a Sherlock Holmes or more than a moment's worth of thought for someone stumbling on either scene to figure them out. In the first one, a claim of rape in a vehicle in the driveway... has any rapist driven up to a house, kidnapped a woman, and raped them in a car in the victim's own driveway? In the second case, a 16 year old claiming that a 17 year old in her bedroom at 2AM is an intruder rather than a boyfriend... the boy, presumably, not exactly wearing a hoodie and sagging jeans?

There may not have been an outright vengeance motive in either case, but willful blindness as to what was going on, because neither of the shooters wanted to believe it, is just as bad, with the same consequences. As to legal consequences, that's up to a jury after seeing far more evidence than we have.
 
Last edited:
tyme said:
....There may not have been an outright vengeance motive in either case, but willful blindness as to what was going on, because neither of the shooters wanted to believe it, is just as bad, with the same consequences. As to legal consequences, that's up to a jury after seeing far more evidence than we have.
Click to expand...
And I think that's exactly right.

It may be that on the surface it looks like the father is legally in the clear, but I don't think it can be a forgone conclusion that he will be exonerated. No doubt this incident will be examined under a microscope, and so far our evaluation of the incident is based primarily on the stories told by the father and the daughter. But in the end, the outcome will be decided by what a grand jury, and perhaps a trial jury, believe actually happened after seeing a lot more evidence than we have now.

I'm not going to make any bets on the outcome -- one way or the other.
 
JimmyR said:
If the father were charged with a first/second degree murder, I would have a hard time indicting.

If the charge came through as Voluntary Manslaughter, I think I would have to vote to indict.
Click to expand...

Why is that? Aside from I'm given to understand they charge the kitchen sink more often than not anyway.

OuTcAsT said:
Really ? whom, and on what charge ?
Click to expand...

Just about anyone, for just about any charge, if the state can make anything better than a half-assed case. The standard for an indictment is supposedly far lower than a guilty verdict. I think it'd be pretty easy for a Prosecutor to present a pretty one sided account of how the daughter really did know the boy, making a fibber out of her, and by extension the Dad, and the Dad obviously knew, etc. etc.
 
Let assume for a moment the father was found to be 100% justified in this shooting.

What charges can/should the daughter face? If we take the news stories as accurate and the father acted based only on what he saw and what he was told by the daughter, it seems she is the one who should/could face charges.

Sort of like the guy who drives the getaway car for a bank robbery or a killing. He may not have known about the shooting because "It was not supposed to happen that way" but he is still charged with murder.
 
I don't know if there's a law against a teenager lying to one's father. If so, we're all felons many times over.

That the daughter should have known/anticipate the father might then take deadly action is up for grabs.

Even then....

- 2:30 AM
- You've just moved into a new neighborhood
- A stranger/man in your daughter's bedroom
- He makes a sudden move that is described to the police as consistent with producing a weapon...

Unless there's something else here -- if I'm on the grand jury -- no true bill.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(Of course everyone knows the sad story of the ham sandwich....)


.
 
Taking the Robertson case from above, the possible charge would be manslaughter for the daughter. Assuming that strange boys are not common place in the girl's bedroom, then a boy unknown to either the father or the daughter would indicate that he is an intruder and hence a danger. This is what the daughter indicated via her story, resulting in the father treating him as an intruder and fearing for his and his family's safety from the intruder.

That may be a bit over the top, but obviously, the daughter is culpable in the boy's death by misleading her father.
 
JimDandy Wrote;
The standard for an indictment is supposedly far lower than a guilty verdict.
Click to expand...

Not really, the Grand Jury has to believe there is a case. Given the info we have here, I can't see a true bill on the man being even remotely considered, the girl ? She could easily be indicted.
 
Not really, the Grand Jury has to believe there is a case.
Click to expand...

Probable Cause in an ex parte Grand Jury session isn't easier to achieve than beyond reasonable doubt that involved an active defense?

Isn't this at least part of why Stand Your Ground laws are made? To give judges an ability and responsibility to dismiss self defense cases that made it through a one-sided grand jury indictment?
 
Stand Your Ground....

I'm not a legal beagle or hold a JD but to my knowledge, in my state(which has Castle Doctrines & Stand Your Ground), you are arrested, indited(formally charged by the State Atty's Office), you are arraigned then you can request a formal Stand Your Ground hearing if the State Atty & a grand jury choose to push the criminal charges on you. The Stand Your Ground hearing can clear you if the court judge feels you can show your actions(lethal force) were justified & prudent IAW state laws(statues).
After that, you are free & clear. You can't face wrongful death lawsuits or civil actions based on the lethal force incident either.

I think many citizens & a few media/national news outlets confuse or distort how the Stand Your Ground laws are applied. The entire process isn't simple or quick nor does a defendant "walk" without due process or adjudication.
 
This was in Texas, which has Castle Doctrine. The dad won't be charged. Tragic but legally justifiable.

There was an incident here in Colorado (we also have very black and white Castle Doctrine) about 2 years ago where a drunk 21 year old college student wandered into a home at 3:30 am in Boulder. She was shot by the homeowner and charged with home invasion. She was an idiot but I'm glad she lived.

We all did stupid things in our youth. I know I certainly did. This is a good lesson to teach our children when their hormones are raging.
 
This was in Texas, which has Castle Doctrine. The dad won't be charged. Tragic but legally justifiable.
Click to expand...
s

Castle doctrine or not, this situation appears to meet the standards for a justified self defense shooting which just as likely would not result in the dad getting charged.
 
"Stupid Things"....

As time goes on or maybe because I'm growing older, I get a tad annoyed with the "we all do stupid things" excuse or the "they were underage" or "they weren't aware of the statues". :rolleyes:
Yes, I too was young once & maybe even a bit foolish. But I did not stumble into the wrong house in a drunken stupor, put on a ski mask & pull a armed robbery in a jewelry or 24hr market, steal or car-jack a vehicle, or run up to some adult I didn't know and assault them.
Parents or adults who make remarks like; "I wouldn't want my child to deal with that." or kids will act up sometimes need to put things into perspective.
These crimes today are not minor or simple.
The "high profile event in central Florida, 2012" is a good example. Many people stated things like; I wouldn't my teenager to be shot! Well then, is your teen going up to unknown adults & beating them to the ground? :rolleyes:

In closing, it's not always "black & white" or "cut & dry" when discussing lethal force events but not everyone is going to feel the exact same.
 
"Stupid Things"....

Human brains aren't fully developed until mid-20's for women and late-20's for men, depending on which research you read. Throw in hormones and booze and we can all see the results.

Unfortunately, these stupid things get people shot.
 
This is a terrible situation, but we've exhausted the legal aspect of the discussion. If we're to discuss the practical aspects, this really isn't the place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top