TexasCHLforum.com

LAYGO wrote:So, I've looked up what people are charged with in various counties, even myself (ahem), but it looks like McLennan County doesn't do online searches! :(

http://www.co.mclennan.tx.us/172/Criminal-Searches
The perp: Andre Dawson

Maybe someone else has another method? I'm sure knowing the perp's name, date of incident, location, etc, we could figure it out.

http://www.co.mclennan.tx.us/185/Sheriffs-Office

suthdj wrote:

LAYGO wrote:So, I've looked up what people are charged with in various counties, even myself (ahem), but it looks like McLennan County doesn't do online searches! :(

http://www.co.mclennan.tx.us/172/Criminal-Searches
The perp: Andre Dawson

Maybe someone else has another method? I'm sure knowing the perp's name, date of incident, location, etc, we could figure it out.

http://www.co.mclennan.tx.us/185/Sheriffs-Office

Well, that confirms what the article said:

DAWSON,ANDRE 11/20/2015 THEFT PROP<$100 PRV CONV BMPD15-01966 INSTANTER
171862 B/M 2,000 SURETY
11/20/2015 CREDIT OR DEBIT CARD ABUS BMPD15-01966 INSTANTER

I don't see how they can make the credit card abuse charge stick just based on the theft. It requires proof that he intended to use the stolen card, which would be hard without his admission. But even though the theft was from the shopping card, it should still have been a robbery because of his fighting with the people trying to restrain him. All it takes is to show someone received a bodily injury, which is as simple as getting one of the helpers to say they felt pain. I could get that robbery conviction easier than the credit card abuse.

But the fact that the woman was carrying without a license really hurts her case. I agree with WTR that this is a great example of the problems with constitutional carry. She really needs training to understand when she can or cannot shoot. I still support constitutional carry but this is a problem with it.

Well, not sure if she just missed or she intended a warning shot, but coming from a military background, there should be no warning shot. If you are presented with a situation that gives you the legal right to discharge your firearm, you should not be shooting to warn. The case being if the situation allows you enough time to fire said warning shot, and wait to see the reaction before firing to hit, it isn't sufficient to have fired in the first place. If you have to fire your weapon, you are doing it because life is in danger and the threat has to be stopped. Granted that's my military minded oppinion so not sure how that relates to texas law, but I personally would have just kept on driving. Not because I'm a coward or anything else, but the situation to me doesn't dictate using a firearm. If the same guy was firing off pop shots at everyone around it would be different.

srothstein wrote:I don't see how they can make the credit card abuse charge stick just based on the theft. It requires proof that he intended to use the stolen card, which would be hard without his admission. But even though the theft was from the shopping card, it should still have been a robbery because of his fighting with the people trying to restrain him. All it takes is to show someone received a bodily injury, which is as simple as getting one of the helpers to say they felt pain. I could get that robbery conviction easier than the credit card abuse.

But the fact that the woman was carrying without a license really hurts her case. I agree with WTR that this is a great example of the problems with constitutional carry. She really needs training to understand when she can or cannot shoot. I still support constitutional carry but this is a problem with it.

If she has a real case for justification of deadly force(questionable), doesn't that also get her off the UCW (46.02)?

oohrah wrote:

K.Mooneyham wrote:Can anyone properly confirm or deny if the woman had a CHL? I heard she did NOT have one, but I would really like to know for sure.

From today's Waco Trib:"Detectgive Kory Martin said the woman, who does not have a concealed handgun license, met with police later Friday after she learned through media reports that officers wanted to speak to her about the incident."

She had no CHL but presumably could have a loaded weapon in her car. If you have a weapon in the car legally, can you never use it?

She did not have it concealed, after all.

The video never shows anything to indicate a concealed carry. She appears to walk over with gun in hand. Then walks away with gun still in hand. It's legal to have it in her vehicle/home unless she is a felon. Hope it works out for her.

After replaying the video a dozen times, I don't think it was a warning shot - just a miss. When you hear the shot, the muzzle is pointed up, but remember the difference between the speed of sound and the speed of light. I think she fired at the suspect, and recoil had raised the muzzle by the time the report reaches the recording cell phone. She is lucky she missed. Her actions were unwise, but I hope the consequences, if any, are minimal.