TexasCHLforum.com

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

seamusTX wrote:

I don't think a person can "steal" a house...

You ain't never seen a house trailer? Anybody can steal one as long as it still has wheels!

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

oh it can be done. just not sure it falls under the same description as "theft" under the law. Then of course there are rights of parties in possession etc etc.

but to me the "intent" here was more along the lines entered with intent to commit a felony ... what is the felony? not sure the code, but there must be some felony crime of dispossessing someone of their home by force. Not sure what exactly that's called, but I know you can't just change someone's locks, walk in, plant your flagpole, and claim this house for God, Country, and Me. There is a law against doing that somewhere I'm sure.

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

Congrats to the Dallas PD for getting all the facts on this case and to the DMN for publishing it on the front page!!

The woman will be no billed and if you read the article you will see why.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... 08de8.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

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

wow.

I saw an update on the news tonight. The guy was a paranoid schizophrenic. They tend to refuse to stay on their medication regularly and can become very unpredictable and violent. Sadly, I think this guy had no mental capacity to ever leave this lady alone and the system failed to give her much choice. It was going to come down to this sooner or later or she was going to have to abandon that house just like former residents did. His family is saying she didn't have to shoot him. I can understand their grief, but apparently they had not been able to control him either and he had already clearly proven he was willing to harm a woman.

(snipped from DMN article)

"That's when the man former neighbors described as "a nut" and "pure evil" was killed in the front yard of the southeast Dallas home that he never could seem to leave after he lost it in 1996."

It sounds like right will prevail for the young woman even if she did shoot him in the "front yard".

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....harmless is as harmless does.....

How many times have we seen the BG's family speaking out after an incident, saying he was a good person, working on turning his life around.....ad nauseum...

I'm very sorry this man died, but his own family couldn't/wouldn't care for him, and there may have been little the state could offer in assistance, either. She did have a restraining order against him, from what I understand, but as far as I know, there are no cases of a piece of paper stopping a determined person...especially one who may not be able to recognize the meaning/relevance.....

Hopefully the Grand Jury will fail to indict the shooter.

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

This guy might have been shot and killed 2 times when found eating in the kitchen or laying on the coach watching TV.
He is was lucky like a cat with 9 lives.

I truly hope she is no-billed.

I've had to deal with a person who is bi-polar, and spent some time in a mental institute.

I found out quickly that the victimizer has more rights than the victim. The Police did all they could.

This guy did a BNE at my parent's house, abducted two of my sisters (her now ex-husband) dogs, and threatened my life.
Went through months of restless nights, thinking every bump in the night was him, breaking in to my home.

That's when I started carrying.
I've had my chl for over 6 years now, but never felt the need to own and carry and pistol, until all this happened.

On the Plus side, he has left the area, he's about 3 hours away, and has remarried (last month). We haven't heard from him since he left.
W00T!!

That thing the family of criminals do. My dad calls that aiding and abetting.

And now you have the rest of the story...

I screwed up. I thought he was on the phone to 911, but it was the lady of the house.