What “precedents” would those be?? Rawhide 1876?? Eastwood vs. Koreans 2002??
You can use “force” to remove trespassers in Texas, NOT “deadly force”. Otherwise, you have to show proof that arson/burglary/physical violence was about to occur or believed to have been about to occur.
The victim was KNOWN, he hadn’t threatened VIOLENCE, he hadn’t ASSAULTED anyone (other than verbally).
“Hey! I’ll just walk inside, grab a gun, and see if THAT makes the situation better!” While the ex-wife sits there, calmly on her phone, showing no concern for her safety (because she KNOWS he’s just yelling, and has a REASON to be doing so).
You're just plain dumb.
So now Read committing Assault & Battery on Carruth is not Assault & Battery. A hostile threat in your face, and then physically being thrown across the yard.....no assault.
Don't ever serve on a jury. You're too blind and dumb for the defendant to get a fair trial.
Go read about “Escalation” (that’s a real term in Texas law) and get back to us. Where was the “assault” BEFORE the boyfriend ESCALATED the argument by bringing a GUN to a VERBAL ARGUMENT?? (Hint: There was none.)
Fer crying out loud....
Read was ordered to leave > Illegal Trespassing > (Carruth brings gun out) > Assault & Battery > Dead
Read escalated the scene before the gun came out....or can't you comprehend facts?
Escalation of the situation by refusal to leave is not the same thing as escalating with a firearm. Walking inside to grab a gun and come back out was a mistake, plain and simple. Cops should have been called and let them sort it out. By dragging a gun into the situation, Carruth turned a verbal altercation where no violence was threatened into an armed conflict. Read should have left, Carruth should have never grabbed a gun. And Carruth deserves every charge he gets for being a [bleep] moron, and for making gun owners look like unhinged [bleep] who are just hankering to kill someone.
