TexasCHLforum.com

The defender was no-billed. All charges were dismissed. The police declared the case closed. Nothing more to see here.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/communit ... -death.ece" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Jim

Just like 1984.

I have seen sites that have an "updated date" and a summary of what changed.

- Jim

I doubt that the defender had a lawyer calling the DMN within one day.

Probably what happened is that the original story was filed late at night based on information from a dispatcher or officer, and was corrected the next day when they got the real story from an official police spokesman.

Newspapers are very allergic to reporting arrests and charges incorrectly. The original version of the story should never have been published.

- Jim

I have to think that the original story was based on some bad information that they got from an unofficial source, and they changed it to avoid a libel suit (which would have been a very real possibility).

Does anyone have a print copy of the September 8 Dallas Morning News in the recycling bin?

- Jim

There's a real problem here.

This is the URL of the Dallas Morning News story that I originally saw on September 8: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... cd618.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It currently does not mention either the lady being arrested nor the deceased being on the phone with 911.

BUT IT DID!

Longhorn_92 copied the text of the story into a forum message here: viewtopic.php?f=83&t=37794#p449472" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It clearly says that the lady was charged with murder and the deceased was on the phone with 911. That is the way that I remember the original story.

I tried to find the original story on the wire or cached in Google News, but I could not find it.

Here is another site where someone copied the original text on September 9:
http://site.ninjacops.com/blog/956/woma ... llas-home/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Jim

lonewolf wrote:I watched the news last night as well, and couldn't believe the man's family said the shooting was not necessary, that the man couldn't hurt anyone...

They nearly always do. It's the psychological process of denial.

It might also be a setup for a lawsuit, though they will likely not find a lawyer that would take the case.

It ought to be news when a family member of the deceased says that they saw this coming or it was deserved. I have seen that a very few times.

If the DA does not prefer charges and there isn't some kind of community outrage, the grand jury is almost guaranteed to no-bill.

- Jim

Thanks for posting that.

The original story was pretty misleading, beginning:

A Dallas woman is accused of fatally shooting a 60-year-old man with mental problems ...

In fact, despite being 60, the guy was 6 feet tall and 300 pounds and had a recent history of violent attacks that the defender knew about.

- Jim

Criminal trespass, I think. PC 30.05.

I doubt a jury in Texas today would indict a woman for defending her home against a kook who had previously attacked her. However, the fine points of the definition of burglary and intent get murky.

- Jim

austinrealtor wrote:I think Seamus is correct that Burglary may not have occured because actual entry may not have occured.

It is not only entry, but intent to commit a felony, theft, or assault.

I don't think a person can "steal" a house. The theft means stuff like TV sets and jewelry.

Of course, "reasonable" and "imminent" and "immediately necessary" clauses will all still come in to play. But I think the clause above "was attempting to enter" provides her quite a bit of leeway, even enough to walk outside and stop the threat before her threshold is breached.

Unless there are facts that are not reported or some kind of bigotry at work, I think this woman will walk.

It's interesting to compare this situation to viewtopic.php?f=83&t=37835" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, where a homeowner fatally perforated a suspected burglar who was outside and had not (yet) attempted to enter by force.

- Jim

Joe Horn shot burglars who had accomplished a burglary and had loot in their hands. It helped his case that the burglars were illegal immigrants. He still got off lucky.

In this case, it is not clear the elements of the crime of burglary were met.

- Jim

Except that "personal property" and your "home" are two distinctly different things both in the eyes of the law and in the "real world".

I agree.

I someone wants my Starter jacket (if I owned one), it's cheaper and easier to replace that than hire a lawyer for even 15 minutes.

Having one's home invaded is a completely different issue. That's why we have a legal principle called Castle Doctrine.

That's why I think this woman is going to walk, though at the moment she probably is not getting a lot of sleep.

- Jim

chasfm11 wrote:3. Head shots in any situation seem to cross the line. I wonder if she had fired the first couple of rounds COM if it would have made any difference.

I don't think so. Being shot in the heart versus the brain are about equally bad for one's health.

We tend to look at the faces of other people. We tend to shoot where we are looking. In fact, there's a book with the title Shoot Where You Look.

I think the fact of the kook being unarmed it the biggest factor in this case.

I set up alerts on these stories that I find interesting. Nothing more has come out.

- Jim

ninemm wrote:I checked on Pennington's driver's license and it is associated with 7519 Gayglen Drive. ... If Pennington's "I.D." was his driver's license (and nowhere did it say that it was - just saying) what are the odds that it was current?

I got my Texas driver license in 1996, and they didn't drag me in for a once-over until this year. You can keep them current for quite a while.

- Jim

It's interesting how people line up on these issues.

I'm in favor of keeping one's cool and using one's brain to resolve this kind of situation, but I'm tall, old, mean, and intimidating when I want to be (and apparently even when I don't want to be). Here you have a single woman with someone drilling out her locks at night. The cops are not exactly responsive. What is she supposed to do?

I also get the impression from comments on the web site that this is a poor and mostly "minority" neighborhood with a bad reputation. I don't know nuthin' about Dallas.

Here's the link again for your convenience: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... cd618.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I see that Kythas has already been there.

- Jim

Purplehood, I can't disagree with you on any factual basis. We weren't there. We don't know. But ...

The woman let her emotions take over. Yes, I would be disgusted with the police, mental-health authorities and anyone else that I can think of. But in no circumstances does that justify one taking a shot at someone that is not threatening you with harm.

If the cops won't intervene, what was she supposed to do? Let the guy take over the master bedroom? It was a no-win situation.

- Jim