Retired Firefighter Shoots Neighbor, Claims Self Defense

Status
Not open for further replies.
The more I read about this guy, the more he is depicted as a murderer.

What can we learn from him?
I would have not done what he did in the first place.
You go looking for trouble, you will find it.
Saying those words does not justify murder.
 
brickeyee said:
It is not hearsay to testify to what someone told you.
Click to expand...
It is when the purpose for which it's offered is to show that what he told the witness is true.

In general, hearsay is defined as an out of court statement, repeated in court, to prove the truth of the matter asserted. There are many exceptions to the general rule that hearsay is not admissible, e. g., hearsay by a party to the litigation. Also, an out of court statement can be repeated in court for various purposes other than to prove the truth of the matter asserted, e. g., state of mind.
 
Since when does "stand your ground" mean going armed on someone else's property where you have no right to be, pulling a gun, and shooting people who are in no way threaten you with death or grievous bodily harm.
Click to expand...

I am not sure why you asked this since it has nothing to do with the situation.

This is the kind of thing that will get those SYG laws repealed and a return to prosecutorial abuse of legitimate self defense. And it is the kind of thing that allows the anti-gun gangsters to demand more gun "control" (ban) laws to "protect good citizens from rabid, insane, right wing, fascist NRA killers."
Click to expand...

Especially if this sort of thing is based on inaccurate descriptions about events that didn't happen. However, if you are going to pose queries in such a manner, why not through out the fact that it is this sort of situation that will get CHL laws repealed as well. Remember, the only way Rodriguez was able to legally take his gun to where the confrontation occurred was because he had a CHL.
 
Especially if this sort of thing is based on inaccurate descriptions about events that didn't happen. However, if you are going to pose queries in such a manner, why not through out the fact that it is this sort of situation that will get CHL laws repealed as well. Remember, the only way Rodriguez was able to legally take his gun to where the confrontation occurred was because he had a CHL.

I had a hard time following that. But I think that's exactly the point that was being made. The idiotic, and murderous actions of psychos like this guy cast a bad light on all CHL holders. It's not fair - but what is?
I for one would really like to see national CHL reciprocity, but I feel that there will be public support for it every time some CHL holder goes nuts. Public opinion of CHLs is rocky enough without stuff like this throwing fuel on the fire.
And - whether we like it or not - public opinion is extremely important.
 
Especially if this sort of thing is based on inaccurate descriptions about events that didn't happen. However, if you are going to pose queries in such a manner, why not through out the fact that it is this sort of situation that will get CHL laws repealed as well. Remember, the only way Rodriguez was able to legally take his gun to where the confrontation occurred was because he had a CHL.

I had a hard time following that. But I think that's exactly the point that was being made. The idiotic, and murderous actions of psychos like this guy cast a bad light on all CHL holders. It's not fair - but what is?
Click to expand...

Nope, not the point being made. The summary description of the events was what doesn't appear to be accurate based on what has been reported. That statement was...

Since when does "stand your ground" mean going armed on someone else's property where you have no right to be, pulling a gun, and shooting people who are in no way threaten you with death or grievous bodily harm.
Click to expand...

Of course, no law says you can do this, but if we are going to say that he did this based on SYG law, then you also have to include the fact that he did it based on CHL law as well. Heck, why not ask where these actions are okay in the Second Amendment?

I don't see where Rodriguez's action were any different than some idiots who have preceded him before SYG was in place.
 
Was he on his own property in danger? No. Was he on a public sidewalk or public property with his gun defending himself? No he was on the victims property when he shot the victim. He should have called the law and made a report. If that didnt work then something would have been a miss. Sounds to me he didnt like his neighbor and he wanted to off him the easy way. Funny isnt it that people that are the true victims defending their selves are the ones who get grilled on trial but people like these who bully people with their guns or go shooting to make it a point they get off on a technicality. Hope he gets a cell and they throw away the key.
 
noway

Noway was he in the right.He decided to go there and confront- with a gun.He should have let the cops handle it.He wanted to shoot someone, and did, and now should go to prison.He had no need to.I see no reason he couldnt have left the scene way before the probs started.Idiot.
 
It seems clear to me the man planned and rehearsed a confrontation mantra he felt would exonerate him in court. He is about to find out he was a belligerent fool who is going to spend a very long time in prison, and rightfully so.
 
I can't believe the attorney for the defense thinks this video is going to help his client. The moron is standing still, right in front of the property, apparently on the telephone with the police, claiming he is in fear for his life, yet he doesn't make any move to leave the scene of the confrontation. SYG gives you a right to defend yourself without having to retreat, yes, but SYG does not provide a free license to initiate a confrontation and then claim you are in fear for your life when you obviously are NOT in fear for your life.

The police had just arrived. If he had been in fear for his life, he would have left and allowed the police to handle it.
 
I don't see where Rodriguez's action were any different than some idiots who have preceded him before SYG was in place.
Click to expand...
There's no real difference. However, if the public perception of SYG laws is that they legalize stuff like this we'll find they start going away.
I think we're in agreement that this seems to have to real connection to SYG, but in an election driven system the perception is often more important than the facts.
 
If he walked out there with a concealed weapon and asked them to turn the music down and lets say the group started throwing glass beer bottles at him and charged him then fine blast away. But I don't see him having a strong case. It's like he was a politician with no substance during a speech, just using key words like stand my ground, I'm in fear for my life etc thinking that would save him legally
 
Having been in law enforcement for over 20 years in the area where this occurred I have been following this case very closely. I have been and always will be a huge supporter of concealed carry here but this guy hurts the cause for everyone.

One of the issues that the defense will have to prove will be was Rodriguez' actions reasonable. He threw out all the scripted phrases of standing his ground and he was in fear of his life. BUT if you are in fear of your life would a reasonable person continue to stand their ground and film for several more minutes leading up to the shooting. A reasonable person will most likely retreat to a safe distance even though they are not obligated to do so. By standing your ground in a situation in which you are claiming to be in fear of your life doesn't hold water here. When you are in fear of your life it is one of two choices no more no less. Fight or Flight. He did neither for 3 or 4 minutes. Instead of one of those choices he phoned the police again and continued to film.

The defense says Rodriguez will take the stand in this case which I highly doubt but if he does I think like the video it will hurt his case of self defense. A first year law student will be able to blow gapping holes in his self defense strategy.
 
Except the way the Texas law is worded, the jury is not allowed to consider whether he could have retreated in determining whether his actions were reasonable IF he qualified for the SYG protection.

The jury must find that he was in a place he had a legal right to be (i.e. not on Danaher's property) and that he did not provoke the confrontation. If Rodriguez cannot show those two elements to the jury, then the jury can consider whether or not a reasonable person would have retreated in that circumstance - and if the jury gets that far, I am pretty sure Rodriguez is going to prison.

Although I suppose that based on the testimony the jury could conclude that Rodriguez went there looking for an excuse to use his gun and could find his fear unreasonable without considering the retreat issue, though I think that would be a tough needle to thread.

More testimony from yesterday reported by the Chronicle: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-t...o-sides-of-Houston-man-accused-of-3626044.php

Rodriguez's neighbor Pete Fornols testified that the day prior to the shooting, Rodriguez had used some foul language to describe Mr. Danaher, so apparently there is some pre-existing anger there, at least on his side. Fornols also testified that Rodriguez called him 13 times that night trying to get him to help complain about the music.
 
Last edited:
Like all senarios, there will be kooks testing themselves and abusing perfectly good laws written for honorable reasons.

HTC Vision on Tapatalk 2
 
Both Sides Rest Their Case

The prosecution finished its case today with the testimony of the widow of Kelly Danaher, which apparently had the jurors crying.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/sides-rest-houston-stand-ground-trial-16550563

The defense made a motion to dismiss the case claiming they had clearly shown all the elements of self-defense. The judge denied the motion and the defense decided not to call ANY witnesses.

It seems to me that Mr. Rodriguez is looking at a very high probability of prison as a result of his choices that night.
 
One neighbor, Terri Hackathorn, told jurors Tuesday that Rodriguez bragged about his guns and told her one could avoid prosecution in a shooting by telling authorities you were in fear of your life and were standing your ground and defending yourself.
Click to expand...

-- That's in one of the stories. Sorry I lost the link. We were discussing if they would hear that.

Interesting side note, from the reports that his CHL instructor said things like this in class (in a link somewhere) - would the instructor be liable in civil court? Could the shooter (from the clink) sue the instructor?

Mods - sorry if this is diversion. Not my forum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top