Man Claims Self-Defense in Killeen Shooting

B

Bartholomew Roberts

Moderator
A bystander captured the shooting of Curtis Shelley via a cell phone. The video shows a lot; but not all of the pre-shooting confrontation. Details are still sketchy but it looks like both parties missed some opportunities to de-escalate.

The video is here:
https://m.liveleak.com/view?i=298_1511216541

A news story of the shooting is here:
http://www.kcentv.com/mobile/articl...tigation-is-related-to-kpd-employee/492740072

One important lesson this shows is both that video cameras are ubiquitous and yet they can still fail to catch important details in a shooting. So you have to assume anything it shows that would reflect on you negatively will be recorded but that nothing that will help your case will be recorded.
 
You can make a video but not shout out that you've called 911 and stops this?

Who I need the truck. If it's the guy with the shotgun it's prison for you.

Looks like the shooter is related to police there and Rangers involved.
 
Shooting an unarmed person will indeed be hard to justify, particularly if there was an "ongoing dispute". Words never beget violence.
 
Sequins said:
Shooting an unarmed person will indeed be hard to justify, particularly if there was an "ongoing dispute". Words never beget violence.
Click to expand...
I want to know if its the shooter's truck, if he got out of that truck and confronted the other guy. If the other guy jumped out and confronted him thats a much better SD claim. Its dressed like he was about to go hunting. Very strange.
 
I was unable to watch the video all the way to the end. I watched as much as I could before cutting out, and to me it looks like it ended in murder.
 
This is an interesting example in how potential jury members might view someone drawing if they are following the Tueller drill and potentially start shooting. When is too close? In this horrible example the shooter did back up quite a bit before shooting. When is there a threat level where a jury finds this reasonable self defense?

Watching it again, the shooter actually shoots when the shootee is standing with his head bent forward (taunting him? threatening to charge him?). Again, if the shooter pulled up in his truck which is in the middle of the street, wowsa.:eek:
 
Last edited:
I hardly watched the video before. I did not see the shooter backing up all the way to the truck. This time I watch the video all the way till the end... still murder. I do not agree that bowing the head forward like that was a man, "about to charge in for fight." I have been training all kinds of martial arts for decades, I know peoples body mechanics.. the guy bowing his head forward also could have meant, "he was getting tired, and he was beginning to back down."
 
That at the lest is 2nd degree murder. I live 20 miles from where that happened. If I were in a jury box my vote would be guilty. It looks to me like the shooter was unaware of the fact that someone was filming the confrontation.

Also there was an ongoing dispute between the two. The shooter is the owner of the truck. He stopped, and got out, opened the rear door, and took the gun out of the back of the truck. He went to the low ready position for a moment as was about to put the gun back in the truck. The shootee then started coming towards him so he brought the gun back up. The shootee then taunted him some more. The shooter then lost patience and shot the guy.

No doubt he is going to be going to a cell. If he is lucky he will get 2nd degree murder, and beg for mercy from the court. I live in this area, and can assure you. Bucky Harris (Assistant DA) is going to go for blood on this one.
 
Last edited:
Psychedelic Bang said:
I hardly watched the video before. I did not see the shooter backing up all the way to the truck. This time I watch the video all the way till the end... still murder. I do not agree that bowing the head forward like that was a man, "about to charge in for fight." I have been training all kinds of martial arts for decades, I know peoples body mechanics.. the guy bowing his head forward also could have meant, "he was getting tired, and he was beginning to back down."
Click to expand...
I would bet he was saying something to the effect of 'shoot me, right in the head.'

Frankly I would not want to be on the jury due to the linkage with the PD there.
 
Yeah I've been thinking about it, think about it this way, if you take out a rifle and point it at me now I have every right to shoot you

Okay, the guy with the right to self-defense in this video is the one who got shot

For all we know the dead man was saying, "Put the gun down Put the gun down let's fight let's fight I'm unarmed I'm unarmed."

By the way posturing your head forward, in the manner this victim seems to have been doing so, is a classic sign of neuroses and not a sign of charging in for a fight.
 
Last edited:
Are you there other articles or updates on this?

So to make this a hypothetical, switch the gun for a pistol and lose the truck ( aka shooter and victim don't know each other). At what point is it a justified shoot?
 
Looked like murder. The victim was taunting maybe, but when does that justify lethal force. As for shouting at a stranger wielding a firearm on a residential street....I wouldn't and I can't blame the videographer for not doing it either.
 
It does make the point that pointing a gun at someone doesn't guarantee that you will get compliance. Many folks have posted that they would hold someone at gunpoint for some reason and seem to expect it will be a magic mind control device.
 
It does make the point that pointing a gun at someone doesn't guarantee that you will get compliance. Many folks have posted that they would hold someone at gunpoint for some reason and seem to expect it will be a magic mind control device.
Click to expand...
The effects of screen fiction, I think.
 
Excellent point

You got it right Zincwarrior.

It's normal to apply logic. Esp. in the heat of passion logic simply does not apply.
 
zincwarrior said:
Because we are logical. It is logical to expect compliance. But we are not dealing with logical people.
Click to expand...

Cause, "bowing your head forward like that is a sign of neuroses." We have no idea what the life story of the dead man in this video was.

1. He could have been severely learning disabled.
2. He could have been emotionally disturbed (so could the shooter)
3. He could have been out of his mind on drugs.

We also are lacking the foreground. We have no idea what made the shooter stop his truck, get out and reach for the weapon - in the eyes of the law, that may very well be irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant is, "was the shooter under enough threat to use deadly force."

I see somebody who shot a unarmed man, and the unarmed man may have been emotionally disturbed, or learning disabled.

I see an enraged man with a rifle, who exited his car, and escalated a situation to the point of murder. The reason I see that is specifically: the victim did not close distance. There was a lot of range, and space, there was no threat of severe bodily injury and harm in the moment the shooter pulled the trigger.

And just because you point a rifle at somebody doesn't mean you should be complied with. That's contradictory to my right to self defense. If you point a rifle at me, I am going to immediately draw and shoot, you can only fire first and wound me beyond my ability to respond
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top