TexasCHLforum.com

http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2016/03 ... says.html/

Been watching the coverage over the last few days. The officer is of course innocent until proven guilty, but I was wondering how he could be fearing for his life when he was the pursuer. From what I've heard, neither the late Mr. Cruz or any other occupant of the charger was armed.

Yeah with the limited details it doesn't look good for the officer, but I will withhold judgement until all facts are in.

I'm familiar with area, both PDs and used to frequent the gas station it happened at. That area is riddled with door kick ins and vehicle burglaries. I know several people who have been victimized several times each, the lack of action by the PDs and property owners put apartment residents at risk of repeat burglaries. Its almost too easy in that area, way to easy.

I bring that up because the frustration for the residents is sky high, I can imagine the officer deciding he wouldn't let his neighbors be victimized and let his frustrations get the best of him, unfortunately ending in a death after a questionable pursuit.

I agree this doesn't look well for him, I think the arrest was the right move, but the PDs in Addison/FB/Dallas need to get to the underlying problem and address the crime in area.

Pursuit in a privately owned car, off duty, ramming the other car, an altercation..... lots of balls in the air on this one. No telling where they will land, or in what order.

"According to the Texas Penal Code, deadly force cannot be used in response to theft of personal property unless it occurs at nighttime, which is defined as 30 minutes after sunset..."

That, plus pursuing them in private car doesn't look good to say the least.

Dunno why, but reading about the pursuit in a personal car made me think of Farva from Super Troopers for some reason.

Not enough facts yet but if a LEO is 24/7 what was he supposed to do? Not saying shooting was the answer unless he was in fear for his life. Also as noted in one of the pieces the definition of night was altered because of daylight savings time. Had the altercation happened one day earlier it would have been official "night". Family will probably end up with a lot of money proving the point that for some crime does pay.

So maybe I missed something, but was the deceased tried and convicted of a crime? Perhaps his record would indicate it, but an off-duty police officer isn't judge, jury, and executioner if he is not being confronted with a threat to his life. As with the officer, guilty until proven innocent. I was shocked by the number of commenters on the story who were on board with what the officer did, even if it may have been a cold blooded killing.

Redneck_Buddha wrote:So maybe I missed something, but was the deceased tried and convicted of a crime? Perhaps his record would indicate it, but an off-duty police officer isn't judge, jury, and executioner if he is not being confronted with a threat to his life. As with the officer, guilty until proven innocent. I was shocked by the number of commenters on the story who were on board with what the officer did, even if it may have been a cold blooded killing.

I have learned to not read comments on news stories like this, there are too many people who don't have a clue but have a cell phone, so they feel they are qualified to make pronouncements and statements that they have no idea about.

rotor wrote:Not enough facts yet but if a LEO is 24/7 what was he supposed to do? Not saying shooting was the answer unless he was in fear for his life. Also as noted in one of the pieces the definition of night was altered because of daylight savings time. Had the altercation happened one day earlier it would have been official "night". Family will probably end up with a lot of money proving the point that for some crime does pay.

I'm also curious if the timeline is 100%. I've seen that it happened between 7-7:30. Technically, sunset at 7:34 that day which equals the definition of night time right?

parabelum wrote:"According to the Texas Penal Code, deadly force cannot be used in response to theft of personal property unless it occurs at nighttime, which is defined as 30 minutes after sunset..."

That, plus pursuing them in private car doesn't look good to say the least.

Nice avatar, Parabellum!

anygunanywhere wrote:

parabelum wrote:"According to the Texas Penal Code, deadly force cannot be used in response to theft of personal property unless it occurs at nighttime, which is defined as 30 minutes after sunset..."

That, plus pursuing them in private car doesn't look good to say the least.

Nice avatar, Parabellum!

And it only gets predictably more disgusting:

http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2016/03 ... suit.html/

Bitter Clinger wrote:And it only gets predictably more disgusting:

http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2016/03 ... suit.html/

Some interesting comments on that article for sure... Of course a few do make an interesting point. How do you sue the City/Department for an off duty police officer who acted outside the police policy ? Will be interesting to see where this one goes. Of course I don't know if it'll keep the media's attention long enough for us to find out.

How do you sue the City/Department for an off duty police officer who acted outside the police policy ?

My understanding from various threads on this forum, is that a Police Officer is never "OFF DUTY".