TexasCHLforum.com

DParker wrote:

LedJedi wrote:I'll be darned... i can't believe i missed that.

Don't feel bad. Every single "legal expert" I've seen/heard on the broadcast news outlets missed it too.

Yup. Everybody's been talking "Castle Doctrine" this and "Castle Doctrine" that. The Castle Doctrine played very little part in the whole incident, if i remember the story correctly (it has been a while). I'm now hearing that the two thieves may have turned towards Mr. Horn, apparently to attack him, which would invoke the Castle Doctrine protections, but he was justified by PC§ 9.43 to stop the theft of his neighbor's property.

Molon_labe wrote:

Skiprr wrote:Horn just cleared by Grand Jury: http://www.click2houston.com/news/16749 ... 0206302008

Awesome!

My buddy says this is good news and bad news...good news is, he is off..bad news is, they can keep coming back at him forever. He told me it would have been better for him to have gone to trial and be found NOT GUILTY then he can NEVER be tried again for the same crime..as it stands now..they can keep coming at him till a grand jury can make it stick

Is this true?

Yes. As discussed previously in this thread, double jeopardy does not apply until an actual trial is held. You can be indicted before a grand jury (and no-billed) an infinite number of times for the same crime, in theory. In practice, what DA, who will eventually have to be re-elected, wants to give his electoral opponent the ammo to defeat him by wasting the money (time) of trying to get a grand jury to indict an un-indictable case (like I think Horn's is)? I think Horn can safely put this one behind him in terms of the legal system. I cannot speak towards the family/friends of the scum he had to stop from committing their crime. He may never be able to stop looking over his shoulder for them.