Texas man cleared of shooting neighbor's robber

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by reefreak29
http:///forum/post/2672467
my first post was that i was torn on the topic , I dont think that he should have gone to jail but he never should have gone over there. what if these guys had guns and the old man was killed? anything could have happened and i would bet he is going to regret that decision the rest of his life. now if he went to the neighbors house and there were people home and they were being hurt in anyway them by all means blow there heads off just tell the kiddies to close there eyes.

Then we are basically on the same page just looking at it from a different direction. You are concerned about the man's safety in general...not the criminals, I apologize for not understanding your point till now.

 

[xtreeme]

Originally Posted by reefreak29
http:///forum/post/2671549
Nice, so much for an intelligent conversation
Ya it got barbaric
"All of you people standing up for the criminals need kicked in the head. "
I dont scare easy.
You all say the deserve to be dead, they are animals beneith you etc. Well, what would the court have done? You dont have that say.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by xtreeme
http:///forum/post/2672683
Ya it got barbaric
"All of you people standing up for the criminals need kicked in the head. "
I dont scare easy.
You all say the deserve to be dead, they are animals beneith you etc. Well, what would the court have done? You dont have that say.

Not having any sympathy for them and "thinking they should be dead" are two different things.

 

[jennythebugg]

if people wouldnt act like beasts we would have no reason to say such, and yes i do think that criminals are beneath us, and i hope other law abiding citizens think so as well. should we just roll over and let the thugs finish taking over the world, and take away the things that we have worked so hard for ? cause thats what im getting from you is that we should just open the door and let them have our stuff and not fight back for ourselves or others. all you are doing by having that attitude is 'telling ' thieves its ok to steal and loot

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by reefreak29
http:///forum/post/2672176
theres that what if again. your right it isnt murder itsmanslaughter and very very poor judgment.
your forgetting some usefull fact one: the dispatcher repeatedly told him to stay put, the criminals would most likely have to run in his direction to get away,one guy was shot not once in the back but twice,the cop ducked for his life so he should no longer be a credible witness.
i really want to know if people would feel the same way if these were a couple of suburban teens
The dispatcher has no right to tell a man to stay in his house. Nor do criminals have the right to scare people into staying in their houses.
The Texas Law is very clear on this. The criminals were illegally in the wrong state if they wanted to be treated as anything else than dangerous criminals...
The cop didn't duck until the shooting began... He saw more up to that point then you did and agreed Horn thought he was in danger.

 

[reefreak29]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2672803
The dispatcher has no right to tell a man to stay in his house. Nor do criminals have the right to scare people into staying in their houses.
The Texas Law is very clear on this. The criminals were illegally in the wrong state if they wanted to be treated as anything else than dangerous criminals...
The cop didn't duck until the shooting began... He saw more up to that point then you did and agreed Horn thought he was in danger.
your right it is texas law, not something im familiar with , if he did that in Illinois he would be on death row and the criminals family would get everything he owns. its unfortunate

 

[xtreeme]

Originally Posted by jennythebugg
http:///forum/post/2672714
if people wouldnt act like beasts we would have no reason to say such, and yes i do think that criminals are beneath us, and i hope other law abiding citizens think so as well. should we just roll over and let the thugs finish taking over the world, and take away the things that we have worked so hard for ? cause thats what im getting from you is that we should just open the door and let them have our stuff and not fight back for ourselves or others. all you are doing by having that attitude is 'telling ' thieves its ok to steal and loot

LOL again it wasnt his property. What your getting from me is, you arent the law. Vigilanty justice isnt welcome here. I never said you should let criminals just do anything.

 

[geridoc]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2672803
The dispatcher has no right to tell a man to stay in his house. Nor do criminals have the right to scare people into staying in their houses.
The Texas Law is very clear on this. The criminals were illegally in the wrong state if they wanted to be treated as anything else than dangerous criminals...
The cop didn't duck until the shooting began... He saw more up to that point then you did and agreed Horn thought he was in danger.
English common law and the 1962 model criminal code both agree in part with you that it is acceptable to use deadly force if a "reasonable person" had reason to fear for his/her safety or life (I am not familiar with the Texas criminal code). The gray area is the term "reasonable person". Is it reasonable to leave your safe house to confront possibly dangerous criminals? I think the dispatcher answered that one by advising him to stay in the house. You may be right that the dispatcher has no right to tell him to stay in the house, the dispatcher has a duty to do so, since it is the reasonable thing to do. It is not reasonable to put your life at risk for things. For life or safety of yourself or others, sure, but not for a TV and a some silverware. And, think about the cop who shows up and finds a bunch of people running around, some with shotguns, and has to figure out in a few seconds who is the victim, who is the criminal and who is the kibbitzer. The fewer people on scene the better. All of that said, I think that Horn was stupid, but a good neighbor who committed manslaughter by putting himself in harms way unnecessarily and against the advice of experienced law enforcement, and then panicking and killing two human beings.

 

[geridoc]

BTW, do note that law enforcement was on the scene and witnessed (more or less) the shooting, so why was the shooting necessary?

 

[bronco300]

curious, what is the difference between horn shooting the criminals for the person who owns the house...they were obviously breaking in and stealing...it wasn't just someone walking out in a hoodie and pillow... glass was breaking,etcetc....everyone who was against him shooting seemed to say if it was his property it wouldn't be such an issue for them...it was his neighbors nonetheless, and they were still breaking the law...why does it matter that it was the neighbor who took the shot instead of the actual home owner...the same act is still being taken...didn't the neighbor say he was happy that he was there to protect his house? I of course don't think anyone should just go around shooting whoever they have a hunch something is happening, but this one was a bit more obvious...I don't know many people who go around breaking their windows to get in and out to move their possessions

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by xtreeme
http:///forum/post/2672985
LOL again it wasnt his property. What your getting from me is, you arent the law. Vigilanty justice isnt welcome here. I never said you should let criminals just do anything.
Actually, his activities were welcomed. Further, his actions followed Texas Law (he feared for his life) and therefore were not criminal.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/2672999
English common law and the 1962 model criminal code both agree in part with you that it is acceptable to use deadly force if a "reasonable person" had reason to fear for his/her safety or life (I am not familiar with the Texas criminal code). The gray area is the term "reasonable person". Is it reasonable to leave your safe house to confront possibly dangerous criminals? I think the dispatcher answered that one by advising him to stay in the house. You may be right that the dispatcher has no right to tell him to stay in the house, the dispatcher has a duty to do so, since it is the reasonable thing to do. It is not reasonable to put your life at risk for things. For life or safety of yourself or others, sure, but not for a TV and a some silverware. And, think about the cop who shows up and finds a bunch of people running around, some with shotguns, and has to figure out in a few seconds who is the victim, who is the criminal and who is the kibbitzer. The fewer people on scene the better. All of that said, I think that Horn was stupid, but a good neighbor who committed manslaughter by putting himself in harms way unnecessarily and against the advice of experienced law enforcement, and then panicking and killing two human beings.
Folks, we are talking about Texas Law here. In Texas, you may use deadly force to protect yourself or your property. In this case he (rightly so) feared for his life.
It is perfectly acceptable behavior to attempt to stop a crime in progress.

 

[nacl freak]

I'd want him for my neighbor! His age also plays a role in the way he perceive's imminent danger.

 

[geridoc]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2673016
Folks, we are talking about Texas Law here. In Texas, you may use deadly force to protect yourself or your property. In this case he (rightly so) feared for his life.
It is perfectly acceptable behavior to attempt to stop a crime in progress.
"Acceptable behavior" and legal behavior are different things. Abortion is legal behavior, but to many, unacceptable.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2672803
The dispatcher has no right to tell a man to stay in his house. Nor do criminals have the right to scare people into staying in their houses.
The Texas Law is very clear on this. The criminals were illegally in the wrong state if they wanted to be treated as anything else than dangerous criminals...
The cop didn't duck until the shooting began... He saw more up to that point then you did and agreed Horn thought he was in danger.
Why discount the word of a policeman simply because he is in a stressful situation? He saw the whole thing.
IMO the real question is why wasn't this officer already on the scene not addressing the situation? This lack of communication put Mr. Horn in alot of jepardy.
Originally Posted by reefreak29
http:///forum/post/2672945
your right it is texas law, not something im familiar with , if he did that in Illinois he would be on death row and the criminals family would get everything he owns. its unfortunate
And that is why texas is better. We take care of the good guys.

Originally Posted by xtreeme
http:///forum/post/2672985
LOL again it wasnt his property. What your getting from me is, you arent the law. Vigilanty justice isnt welcome here. I never said you should let criminals just do anything.
He was on his property, This isn't vigilanty justice. He didn't fire the gun to punish the people for robbing.
He fired his gun because at the point where he confronted them they charged him. And both he Mr. Horn, and the police officer who witnessed this, both say that they felt at that point Mr. Horn was in danger.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/2673004
BTW, do note that law enforcement was on the scene and witnessed (more or less) the shooting, so why was the shooting necessary?
Plain clothes cop arrived just as the stuff came down. He never had a chance to get involved.

 

[reefraff]

Texas having a statute allowing lethal force to be used to protect a neighbor's property makes it pretty obvious that it is perfectly acceptable to confront someone robbing a house.
I really don't get the attitude that it is wrong to take action. If you are comfortable with confronting them go for it. If not then call the cops and stay inside

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2673163
Texas having a statute allowing lethal force to be used to protect a neighbor's property makes it pretty obvious that it is perfectly acceptable to confront someone robbing a house.
I really don't get the attitude that it is wrong to take action. If you are comfortable with confronting them go for it. If not then call the cops and stay inside

I believe that the way they let him off the hook wasn't about property but because he felt like he was in danger.

 

[geridoc]

So, if I understand this right, Horn, against advice, left his house, put himself in jeopardy and then shot to death two people who were trespassing on his property after burglarizing another property. I have closely examined Texas law (tongue firmly in cheek here), and cannot find that the death penalty is lawful for trespass or burglary. That's why we have cops (who, remember, were on scene at the time of the killings) and courts - so that the punishment fits the crime and not some person's vision, rooted in the wild west, of crime and punishment. I don't doubt that the grand jury returned no true bill - no elected prosecutor would seek to prosecute Horn and expect to see his career thrive, but Horn sought out an opportunity that led to his killing two people. He is not a murder, but is surely an idiot. If a burglar were leaving my property I wouldn't want Bob, my neighbor, killing them. Just call the police, get a license number, whatever, but don't risk your life! And don't kill anyone! My silverware isn't worth another person's life.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2673174
I believe that the way they let him off the hook wasn't about property but because he felt like he was in danger.
Yeah but if he didn't have the right to confront them I doubt they would have let him off because he placed himself in that situation.