Retired Firefighter Shoots Neighbor, Claims Self Defense

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think most instructors use a pretty standard liability-damage waiver.

I do, and everyone I know who teaches does. Won't stop someone from suing, of course, but it will stop them from winning.

Morally, we're no more liable than the gun manufacturer.
 
Bartholomew Roberts said:
...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...
Click to expand...
It'll be interesting to see if the jury gets self defense instructions.
 
The whole case is interesting, and I think the entire world must be following it. That link to the Houston Chronicle article took forever to load.

My read at this stage is that his only chance will be to appeal based on ineffectual representation during the trial. I imagine a motion to dismiss is probably standard operating procedure, but to then rest without calling any witnesses when the motion is denied simply astonishes me. If the attorney for the defense genuinely believes that video is going to help his client, then I know a defense attorney who got sold some bad dope.
 
Aguila Blanca said:
...but to then rest without calling any witnesses when the motion is denied simply astonishes me. If the attorney for the defense genuinely believes that video is going to help his client, then I know a defense attorney who got sold some bad dope.
Click to expand...
Unless any witnesses he might be able to call would be worse.
 
Frank Ettin said:
It'll be interesting to see if the jury gets self defense instructions.
Click to expand...

I am thinking they will get to see it, though I am interested in how it will be worded and whether he will get SYG instructions. Apparently there was enough controversy over the instructions that they delayed the closing arguments until today in order to work them out. So the jury should start deliberating today as well.

A quick highlight of some of the testimony so far:

1. The man who is laughing who rushed Rodriguez is Johnson, a Houston firefighter. He had a blood alcohol level of 0.27 when he was tested. He was injured severely enough that they put him into an induced coma, and the combination of alcohol and coma apparently came with a fair amount of memory loss of the incident.

For me, it highlights the difficulty of trying to control a crowd of drunk males, regardless of whether they are friendly to you or hostile.

2. We heard from many of Rodriguez's neighbors. All of them testified for the prosecution, including ones Rodriguez tried to get to help him with his complaint.

3. Ken Ellis, one neighbor, testfied there were four shots fired total. Two close together and then two separate shots a little later. He also testified that this was the first time there was a party at this place in three years, so I am not sure where the preexisting hostility that Rodriguez had for Danaher mentioned in other neighbor's testimony came from.
 
In another trial, a noticeable delay between shots was used by the prosecution to claim this indicated a premediated kill shot. Chris Cox reported on the case in the American Rifleman.

Wonder if this was mentioned?
 
Interesting point, Glenn, but I seriously doubt the prosecution could prove that the delayed shot (if indeed there was one) is the shot that killed the victim.

My prediction: he won't get off for justifiable homicide. If I were a juror, I'd probably vote for manslaughter, given the fact that both sides appear to be at fault.
 
my opinion

this guy is guilty of excessive force not murder...he had chance to retreat but,stayed... when given a clear order to stop and stay put ,you might want to do as you are told to prevent being shot,but on the other hand dealing with stupid drunks and numb brain cells guess what...drunk always lose...if I'm on a jury and the real facts and all the facts are presented ,I would vote not guilty....now that being said the dispatcher should have a car respond code 3 when she heard the word gun......and the dispatcher knew the disturbance call had elevated from loud music to a physical confrontation ....
 
its people like this that mis-use our laws that make it hard for us to defend ourselves. a gun is a tool to be used to protect yourself or others. not as an intimidation factor to get some partyers to turn down their music.

imo (from what i saw and heard) thats murder. if he was gonna be so in fear of his life he shouldnt of gone in the first place. and the fact that he took a gun with him shows me he was on an ego check and was wanting to justify killing someone.
 
Nighthawk681 said:
this guy is guilty of excessive force not murder...
Click to expand...
He's guilty of either murder or manslaughter because someone died by reason of his acts. That is, of course, unless the jury exonerates him finding his use of force to have been justified or finds the shooting to have been an excusable accident. The jury finding his actions to have been justified seems unlikely, and an excusable accident finding seems extremely unlikely.

In any case, we'll probably know fairly soon.
 
Last edited:
The jury has been deliberating since around 1pm with a break at 4pm. Still no word. KHOU has a reporter live-tweeting the trial.

Nighthawk681 said:
..if I'm on a jury and the real facts and all the facts are presented ,I would vote not guilty....
Click to expand...

So what are the REAL facts that would lead you to that not guilty vote?
 
The jury forgot to include the charge of gross stupidity

His tone doesn't sound anything like the few people I've heard first hand who were truly in fear of their life.

His video didn't do him any favors IMHO.

The jury did their job.
 
good call.HE WAY outstepped his bounds.He is a flat out killer.Shooting someone over loud music?Im glad he's going to prison.
 
Gang,

Just spend today reading about this whole thing.

The Idiot bragged about ways to get around the SYG law and kill someone, he brought a gun to ANOTHER persons house to argue with them, displayed the gun, and he shot the guy after 'someone lunged at him'.

So yea, I'd convict him of murder (as they did.) And personally I say it was an easy case. I would not loose a minute sleep convicting this guy.

The SYG law was designed for those minding their own business and someone comes up and assaults them. It was NOT to go around provoking fights and then 'standing your ground'.

Well he paid the price for his arrogance and blood lust.

Happy Huntsville he goes.

Deaf
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top