Oh, you mean “crimes committed” AFTER Carruth Spent 30 seconds going inside and getting a gun to bring to a trespassing and verbal altercation??? Ummm.... “provocation”
The third element requires some evidence that you intended your act or words to create a pretext in order to kill the victim as some larger plan that later included a claim of self-defense. Again, Texas courts hold that even though you do or say something that does indeed provoke an attack, if you did not intend for your act to have such an effect as part of a larger plan of doing another harm, then you do not lose your right of self-defense. Proving intent can be very challenging; however, the jury could conclude that some provoking acts may be of such a character as to carry the inference of intent—such as walking toward someone with a rifle after you have had an argument.
Gee, who walked toward Carruth while holding a rifle? The article just "proved" by Read "walking toward someone with a rifle", he in fact met the element of "PROVOCATION".
Your "own" reference proves you wrong.
Actually he started the provocation to escalate it when he committed criminal trespassing by refusing to leave when asked to.
"He is far from Stupid"
”person, who happens to have an above-average level of intelligence”
He boiled it down to this - can you convince a jury there was a necessity at that point, when the guy is 10 feet away , to be shot in order to protect yourself or someone else from bodily harm?
He says its going to be tough because the video shows the situation was more or less de-escalated at that point.
But he conceded that all it takes is proof that he was advancing as opposed to standing still to change his mind, and likely win over a Texas jury (outside of Austin)
He also talked quite a bit about Texas law and while the porch is part of the domicile in Texas, its going to be hard to prove he was threatened in his home. I'm not sure I agree with his logic but he was saying that in self defense there is a difference in pushing someone off a porch versus, say being dragged out by your feet , but the other lawyers weren't convinced that Texas law really made that distinction.
I don't know, the other people who were interviewing him weren't convinced that the timing of it truly established the situation was de-escalated to the point that imminent harm wasn't a reasonable concern.
Branca wasn't swayed by it though and says this doesn't meet the criteria to establish self defense. I listened to them go back and forth for about 20 minutes on the topic. Branca is arguably the nations expert on self defense laws.
have you paid your dues, can you moan the blues, can you bend them guitar strings
I’ve posted the appropriate TX Penal Code Statues multiple times.
Pathological liar.
No posting has been made anywhere in this thread showing a Texas statute that brandishing a firearm on a Habitation meets the element of "PROVOCATION".
Stop lying, and post the TX statute you claim that proves the firearm meets the element of PROVOCATION.
Real simple if your I.Q. is above 80.
ROFLMAO.
2 "FULL" days, and NADA.
No TX Statute Law against brandishing a Gun = No Murder = NO BILLED.
Using weapons in a dangerous, threatening, or reckless manner is a crime. In Texas, the reckless use of a weapon is known as “deadly conduct” and can be charged as either a misdemeanor or felony offense, depending on the circumstances.
Danger of Harm
You can commit a deadly conduct offense in Texas whenever you engage in any type of conduct that you know, or should know, will place someone else at risk of suffering serious bodily injury. For example, if you point a gun at someone else, you can be charged with deadly conduct even if you never fire the weapon or never intend to fire it. It's enough that you intentionally brandish the weapon and know, or should know, that such an act poses a danger to someone else.
(Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.05.)
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a welfare check, a forty ounce malt liquor, a crack pipe, an Obama phone, free health insurance. and some Air Jordan's and he votes Democrat for a lifetime.
SC, that name is way too long, ain't nobody got time for that.
Just call him "honey pew pew," it's much more fitting.
LOL. Actually, Dipschitt would be much more appropriate.
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
SC, that name is way too long, ain't nobody got time for that.
Just call him "honey pew pew," it's much more fitting.
LOL. Actually, Dipschitt would be much more appropriate.
DipschittPewPew?
Him/her has some serious 🧐 mental issues…😂
Yep. Most BatSchitt Crazy Psyco To ever post on the Fire.
If he ever owned a real gun, he’d be front page news.
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
. LUBBOCK, Texas — Jinx Read, the mother of Chad Read, as well as his three children, filed a lawsuit Monday against Kyle Carruth and his businesses. Carruth shot and killed Read in November over a child custody dispute.
According to court records, Carruth is accused of negligence for several things, including using deadly force when not justified, discharging a firearm “merely to threaten an individual,” failing to call authorities and failing to render aid.
Court records said Jinx Read and Chad’s children have “suffered mental and emotional anguish, including mental and emotional pain, torment and suffering, ultimately resulting from the death of a loving father and son and will continue to suffer such in the future.”
The lawsuit is seeking punitive damages.
Carruth has never been named by police or prosecutors as the shooter. However, his name has been used in civil filings several times.
As of December 6, no criminal charges had been filed against Carruth or anyone else concerning the shooting.
. LUBBOCK, Texas — Jinx Read, As of December 6, no criminal charges had been filed against Carruth or anyone else concerning the shooting.
No criminal charges had been filed...........
No [bleep] shît, shît for brains.
ElkTurdBurglar will disappear from The Fire when Carruth is charged. The Strain Will Be More Than He Can Bare 🤪🤪🤪
Last edited by chlinstructor; 12/06/21.
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
LOL. The Campfire Retard is off his Psych Meds again and just escaped the State Hospital.
Bless his little Lying Window Licking Retarded Pea Brain. 🤪🤪🤪
Wind him up and watch him Go
#ElkTurrdBurglar @BatschittCrazy.Com
Why are you Copying / Using this recent c-himp video from what someone else posted recently?
Is it because:
A) You’re too stupid to think for yourself? B) You’ve always been a follower. C) You’ve never been a leader. D) You’re simply a Useful Idiot with a Super Low I.Q. E) All of the above.
And that about proves why chlinstructor can’t discuss the actual law in detail to back up his lying concerning this case……it takes a functioning brain.
"He is far from Stupid"
”person, who happens to have an above-average level of intelligence”
. LUBBOCK, Texas — Jinx Read, As of December 6, no criminal charges had been filed against Carruth or anyone else concerning the shooting.
No criminal charges had been filed...........
No [bleep] shît, shît for brains.
ElkTurdBurglar will disappear from The Fire when Carruth is charged. The Strain Will Be More Than He Can Bare 🤪🤪🤪
ROFLMAO
Tough guy here, CHLINSTRUCTOR, threatens to murder me from his house while I'm stopped on a bridge in this thread, and is too chicken schit to post an address for his front gate and then posts badazz pictures like this to brainwash the idiots here he's a tough guy.
Holy crap this site is entertaining to watch the freaks create these delusional dreams in their scrambled minds.
Where's that TX statute to prove brandishing a firearm meets the element for provocation you claim applies here.
3-4-5-6-7.......days and waiting...
"He is far from Stupid"
”person, who happens to have an above-average level of intelligence”
Oh, you mean “crimes committed” AFTER Carruth Spent 30 seconds going inside and getting a gun to bring to a trespassing and verbal altercation??? Ummm.... “provocation”
Not in Texas. I just specifically explained and proved in detail 22.05 does not apply. You keep trying to insist provocation happened when there is "no" law stating bringing a gun to an argument meets the element of provocation.
Hadn't read the article yet, but doesn't matter, because there is no law. I've already specifically shot down the law that could've possibly applied, but I proved the elements were not met.
I'll give you a little crumb...the very second Read "stepped" onto the porch he no longer had a defense, none, nada.
Run along Retard and Debate yourself some more. We’re all here Laughing our asses off at your Psycho Ramblings. Like I said, your too Fuqking Stupid to realize your the Laughing Stock of the Campfire. Which just makes it that more entertaining! 🤪🤪🤪
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
. LUBBOCK, Texas — Jinx Read, As of December 6, no criminal charges had been filed against Carruth or anyone else concerning the shooting.
No criminal charges had been filed...........
No [bleep] shît, shît for brains.
ElkTurdBurglar will disappear from The Fire when Carruth is charged. The Strain Will Be More Than He Can Bare 🤪🤪🤪
ROFLMAO
Tough guy here, CHLINSTRUCTOR, threatens to murder me from his house while I'm stopped on a bridge in this thread, and is too chicken schit to post an address for his front gate and then posts badazz pictures like this to brainwash the idiots here he's a tough guy.
Holy crap this site is entertaining to watch the freaks create these delusional dreams in their scrambled minds.
Where's that TX statute to prove brandishing a firearm meets the element for provocation you claim applies here.
3-4-5-6-7.......days and waiting...
Scared little bitch, aren’t ya boy. Already told ya where I lived. Like I said, all you got do is PM me when you reach that bridge. I’ll invite ya right into my “domicile” 🤪 Even take ya hog hunting. They like eating SCHIT
Course, we all know you ain’t got the intestinal fortitude of a piece of Chicken Schitt.
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
The third element requires some evidence that you intended your act or words to create a pretext in order to kill the victim as some larger plan that later included a claim of self-defense. Again, Texas courts hold that even though you do or say something that does indeed provoke an attack, if you did not intend for your act to have such an effect as part of a larger plan of doing another harm, then you do not lose your right of self-defense. Proving intent can be very challenging; however, the jury could conclude that some provoking acts may be of such a character as to carry the inference of intent—such as walking toward someone with a rifle after you have had an argument.
Gee, who walked toward Carruth while holding a rifle? The article just "proved" by Read "walking toward someone with a rifle", he in fact met the element of "PROVOCATION".
The article uses as an example someone *with a rifle* walking toward another person, not simply walking toward a person with a rifle.
![[Linked Image from memegenerator.net]](https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/50379295/ill-be-your-huckleberry.jpg)