PDA

View Full Version : Joe Horn no-billed in TX shootings


GalilARM
November 27, 2007, 05:52 PM
Yeehaw another victory for Texas self defense! I was sure afraid this guy would get nailed, even though he did the right thing, but nope. Not in Texas! Hopefully criminals will start to learn than they aren't welcome here, and that there are lots of people who wont hesitate to take their lives. Joe Horn is a hero.


HOWEVER It ****** me off to no end that they always refer to the bad guy as "the shooting victim". What the hell is that? And why the hell is this "Diamond Ortiz" complaining about Horn being so "eager to shoot"? Her babiesdaddy was so "eager" to rip off people more affluent than him, and in Texas that gets you killed. Have fun raising that kid by yourself because your boyfriend was an idiot you trashy bitch. Man I love Texas.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Man Uncharged In Double Shooting Deaths
Shooting Could Test Self-Defense Laws

HOUSTON (AP)-- The cha-chick of a shell entering a shotgun's chamber rattled through the 911 line just before Joe Horn stepped out his front door.

Horn, 61, had phoned police when he saw two men break into his neighbor's suburban Houston home through a window in broad daylight. Now they were getting away with a bag of loot.

"Don't go outside the house," the 911 operator pleaded. "You're going to get yourself shot if you go outside that house with a gun. I don't care what you think."

"You want to make a bet?" Horn answered. "I'm going to kill them."

He did.

Admirers, including several of his neighbors, say Horn is a hero for killing the burglars, protecting his neighborhood and sending a message to would-be criminals. Critics call him a loose cannon. His attorney says Horn just feared for his life.

Prosecuting Horn could prove difficult in Texas, where few people sympathize with criminals and many have an almost religious belief in the right to self-defense. The case could test the state's self-defense laws, which allow people to use deadly force in certain situations to protect themselves, their property and their neighbors' property.

Horn was home in Pasadena, about 15 miles southeast of Houston, on Nov. 14 when he heard glass breaking, said his attorney, Tom Lambright. He looked out the window and saw 38-year-old Miguel Antonio DeJesus and 30-year-old Diego Ortiz using a crowbar to break out the rest of the glass.

He grabbed a 12-gauge shotgun and called 911, Lambright said.

"Uh, I've got a shotgun," he told the dispatcher. "Uh, do you want me to stop them?"

"Nope, don't do that," the dispatcher responded. "Ain't no property worth shooting somebody over, OK?"

Horn and the dispatcher spoke for several minutes, during which Horn pleaded with the dispatcher to someone to catch the men and vowed not to let them escape. Over and over, the dispatcher told him to stay inside. Horn repeatedly said he couldn't.

When the men crawled back out the window carrying a bag, Horn began to sound increasingly frantic.

"Well, here it goes, buddy," Horn said as a shell clicked into the chamber. "You hear the shotgun clicking, and I'm going."

A few seconds passed.

"Move," Horn can be heard saying on the tape. "You're dead."

Horn redialed 911 and told the dispatcher what he'd done -- shot and killed the two men.

"I had no choice," he said, his voice shaking. "They came in the front yard with me, man. I had no choice. Get somebody over here quick."

Lambright said Horn had intended to take a look around when he left his house and instead came face to face with the burglars, standing 10 to 12 feet from him in his yard.

Horn is heavyset and middle-aged and would have been no match in a physical confrontation with the two men, who were young and strong, Lambright said. So when one or both of them "made lunging movements," Horn fired in self-defense, he said.

Family members of the two shooting victims have made few public statements.

Diamond Morgan, Ortiz's widow, who has an 8-month-old son with him, said she was stunned by Horn's statements on the 911 tape. "It's horrible," she said. "He was so eager, so eager to shoot."

The Associated Press could not find a telephone listing for Morgan.

Pasadena police were still investigating Monday and planned to present their findings to Harris County prosecutors within the next two weeks, police spokesman Vance Mitchell said. From there, it is expected to be presented to a grand jury. In the meantime, Horn remains uncharged.

Texas law allows people to use deadly force to protect themselves if it is reasonable to believe they could otherwise be killed. In some cases, people also can use deadly force to protect their neighbors' property; for example, if a homeowner asks a neighbor to watch over his property while he's out of town.

At issue is whether it was reasonable for Horn to fear the men and whether his earlier threats on the 911 call showed he planned to kill them no matter what, said Fred C. Moss, who teaches criminal law at Southern Methodist University in Dallas.



-------------------------------------------------

BillCA
November 27, 2007, 07:08 PM
Not so fast.

This story didn't say a grand jury no-billed him. It just said that police are still "investigating" and that no charges were pending on him at this time.

Pasadena police were still investigating Monday and planned to present their findings to Harris County prosecutors within the next two weeks, police spokesman Vance Mitchell said. From there, it is expected to be presented to a grand jury. In the meantime, Horn remains uncharged.

This is much different that being no-billed by a grand jury.
Joe Horn ain't outta the woods quite yet.

RJay
November 27, 2007, 07:15 PM
I know this posting will invite some very interesting replies but what the hey. I for one am not sure he was in the right, he was told not to go outside, he went anyway. His life was in danger, his neighbors life was not in danger, I feel he wanted to play Wyatt Earp and right all the wrongs of the world by himself. If I was on the Grand Jury, with just the information I've read, I'm afraid I would have to vote against him. Sorry about that.:eek:

dwatts47
November 27, 2007, 07:34 PM
What kind of shells did he have that he killed two men with only three shots? It obviously wasn't squirrel shot.

It was a shotgun guy... I'm suprised it took 3.


I would never say "I'm going to kill them" to anyone,especially the 911 operator, but I hope to god the guy isnt charged with a crime.

rb4browns
November 27, 2007, 07:48 PM
My first reaction was "heck yeah," but as I think about it more I don't think he did the right thing. I hate the fact that those guys broke in to some innocent person's home and stole their stuff. But that alone is not deserving of the death penalty. For sure he did not have to leave his own property and go to someone elses with the expressed intent of shooting them.

I hate crime and I have no sympathy for criminals. At the same time, this wasn't self defense and those guys did not have to be killed over a house burglary. The only person I feel bad for is the little 8 month old baby. What a crappy family to be born in to and now to not have a father. Oh well.

Sigma 40 Blaster
November 27, 2007, 07:53 PM
Calling the woman a b**** for pointing out the truth is a bit much. He was itching to shoot, even said he was going to kill them. I wonder if the entry wounds were in their front or back. There were technically three sets of victims here, robbery victims, murder victims, and stupidity victims.

Any danger this guy was supposedly in was self made, he was being implored to stay in where it was safe and wait on the police. I already have said enough about this idiot...he won't be charged but this type of stupidity is what's going to make deadly force legislation even more complicated.

Alleykat
November 27, 2007, 07:55 PM
You guys don't know whether it was self defense or not. I believe the case has been no-billed, but that might not be accurate. The shooting was witnessed by a plain clothes cop; the perps were in Joe's yard; Joe said they came at him and that he fired in s.d.

He shouldn't have told the dispatch operator that he was going to kill them, but he also wasn't obligated to take legal advice from a dispatch operator.

Too bad he had to waste a shot. Should have done the job with two shots. I hope Joe sues the estates of the two parasites.

mvpel
November 27, 2007, 07:56 PM
The burglars were just taking some things away on behalf of the common good - and bypassing the middleman.

http://jerhad.typepad.com/jerhad/images/hillary_8.jpg

bdcbbq
November 27, 2007, 08:00 PM
I don't think he should have gone outside. There really wasn't any reason too. I'm more concerned that what he did may encourage others to "push" the envelope in these situations with the result being more ammunition for the antis. Those folks in the middle on castle doctrine/gun rights aren't going to be swayed to our side by this story.

The decision to go outside at a minimum has cost him at least $10,000+ in attorney's fees. I'm sure the neighbors aren't going to pitch in for that.
If he was inside, looking out and watching, and these guys started towards his house he would be in a lot less legal trouble.

Wildalaska
November 27, 2007, 08:09 PM
Too bad he had to waste a shot. Should have done the job with two shots. I hope Joe sues the estates of the two parasites.

Taking the moral high ground I see:barf:

WildnowondertheythinkweshouldnthavegunsAlaska ™

tony pasley
November 27, 2007, 08:10 PM
Right or wrong by what he did the neighborhood is safer today from crime than it was before.

GalilARM
November 27, 2007, 08:37 PM
I cant think of how stupid you would have to be to advance towards a guy with a shotgun. Criminals today have been conditioned to do or say anything, because they know they will get away with it.

Just like a dog that bites a kid, these guys proved that they dont need to be around anymore. The police were nowhere to be found, so this guy did their job instead.

People who wish-wash and say that this guy wasn't quite in the right are giving the anti-gunners and anti-self defenders more room to argue. Whats the point of turning on a guy who defends his community so we can protect our own reputations? What if the guys neighbors HAD been home and he didnt know it? What if they were dead on the kitchen floor? Neither Horn or the operator would have known this at the time, but somehow I bet you guys would be much more likely to side with him if that was the case. What difference does it make if they were burglars or not? They were criminals. They are dead. I guarantee you that NOBODY misses these people. Well except for the "widow" who doesnt seem to realize that her husband was killed during the commission of a crime. I cant believe that some of you people would actually side against this man in a court of law.

I know one thing is for sure, if I ever have to kill someone in defense of my life or my family or my resources, I sure wont come here expecting full support. I'd probably be crucified for "jeopardizing our rights to self defense" or some BS like that. I wasnt born in Texas, but I got here as fast as I could. This is just one more reason why I'm so glad I did.

rb4browns
November 27, 2007, 09:15 PM
People who wish-wash and say that this guy wasn't quite in the right are giving the anti-gunners and anti-self defenders more room to argue. Whats the point of turning on a guy who defends his community so we can protect our own reputations? What if the guys neighbors HAD been home and he didnt know it? What if they were dead on the kitchen floor?

Oh please. It's people who salivate at the idea of shooting someone and rejoice when things like this happen that give anti-gunners ammo. If the neighbors were dead on the kitchen floor they would already be dead, and if you want to go play Rambo/SuperCop/Hero by storming in to a burglary in progress go right ahead. I too got to Texas as soon as I could, but not for this. I have a wife and baby and have no urge to risk getting killed for my neighbors HDTV. That guy didn't kill those burglars because his life or his family's lives were in danger (let alone his stuff which is a pretty stupid reason to kill someone or risk your life for). He decided to be a hero or a tough guy and went rushing in to a situation where he should not have been. For what? His neighbors stuff? As far as nobody missing the guy who got shot, he had an 8 month old baby. Innocent kids count as "NOBODY" to you?

I'm not the one giving anti-gunners ammo buddy, it's the mall ninjas, blowhards and wannabe Rambos here who take care of that.

TexasSeaRay
November 27, 2007, 10:04 PM
Oh please. It's people who salivate at the idea of shooting someone and rejoice when things like this happen that give anti-gunners ammo. If the neighbors were dead on the kitchen floor they would already be dead, and if you want to go play Rambo/SuperCop/Hero by storming in to a burglary in progress go right ahead. I too got to Texas as soon as I could, but not for this. I have a wife and baby and have no urge to risk getting killed for my neighbors HDTV. That guy didn't kill those burglars because his life or his family's lives were in danger (let alone his stuff which is a pretty stupid reason to kill someone or risk your life for). He decided to be a hero or a tough guy and went rushing in to a situation where he should not have been. For what? His neighbors stuff? As far as nobody missing the guy who got shot, he had an 8 month old baby. Innocent kids count as "NOBODY" to you?

I'm not the one giving anti-gunners ammo buddy, it's the mall ninjas, blowhards and wannabe Rambos here who take care of that.

A. Why don't you go back to wherever you came from.

There is obviously a reason you opted to come to Texas. We're independent down here, don't take crap off criminals and don't give a rat's ass what the Fourth Estate thinks of us. If we listened to all the other whiners in the press and liberal, crime-loving/sheep-pack states, we'd be in a real world of hurt.

B. A criminal is a criminal whether he is in my house or my neighbor's house. I grew up in the country and we watched out for each other. Some bum (nowadays known as "economically displaced homeless victims) broke into a neighbor's house or barn, his life expectancy was lowered drastically. And if the DA and Sheriff wanted to keep their jobs, they damn sure no-billed whoever defended their property or their neighbor's property.

We're starting to go to hell in a handbasket because of all you bleeding heart "ain't no property worth defending at the point of a gun" attitudes.

Tell you what, hoss. My property is MY property and I'll defend it. You (generic "you") want it? Go get a damned job, save your paychecks and EARN IT! Same goes for my neighbors' property. They watch out for me and we watch out for them.

In the old days when everyone did that, we didn't have much crime.

I know this posting will invite some very interesting replies but what the hey. I for one am not sure he was in the right, he was told not to go outside, he went anyway. His life was in danger, his neighbors life was not in danger, I feel he wanted to play Wyatt Earp and right all the wrongs of the world by himself. If I was on the Grand Jury, with just the information I've read, I'm afraid I would have to vote against him. Sorry about that.

This attitude epitomizes everything that is wrong with us as a society today.

Who gives a damn about their neighbors anymore? Who gives a damn about anyone but themselves?

Bunch of freaking sheep.

Jeff

GalilARM
November 27, 2007, 10:29 PM
Whoever made the official decision that killing someone in defense of property was an immoral decision anyway? Isn't that a decision to be left to the individual? We already know that you are covered legally (at least in Texas) so all that is left is the moral question. I dont see any problem in taking someones life to defend my property. Am I a psychopath? No. A sociopath? No. Am I some sick, twisted individual with no respect for humanity? No. Far from it. People have the right to be born into this world as free beings. You have to EARN the right to continue living that way. One of the fastest ways to prove that you are incapable of doing so is to commit criminal acts against your fellow man. There is a lot less separating people from animals than some of us like to realize. Just like a dog that bites its owner or mauls a child, no matter how "innocent" or "harmless" it seems to be, these people need to be removed from circulation, so to speak. I dont see how you can sit here and say that even though these guys were stealing from another mans home, they didnt deserve what happened to them? If you play with fire, you might get burned. Whether its a singe to the finger or a full-body, skin melting burn, you had it coming from the start. Some of you who think you are dyed-in-the-wool supporters of our rights turn out to be an outright embarrassment with the fence-riding and finger pointing behavior that goes on. Two very bad men are dead, since when do we side with them in any way, shape or form?

Thunderhawk88
November 27, 2007, 10:40 PM
You guys don't know whether it was self defense or not.

He was in no danger til he went outside and placed himself there.

Whoever made the official decision that killing someone in defense of property was an immoral decision anyway? Isn't that a decision to be left to the individual?

Actually, I think there is a power even higher to decide that, and I sure wouldn't want to face him with something like this.

Oh please. It's people who salivate at the idea of shooting someone and rejoice when things like this happen that give anti-gunners ammo.

The antis are already playing the tape to show how bad us gun-owners are.

Deaf Smith
November 27, 2007, 10:46 PM
There is such a thing as citizens arrest. He could go out there and arrest them. But, civil libility would be the real problem (and I bet will be for him.)

I don't know if the two creeps tried to attack him or not (and that would be self-defense.) Or if they were leaving with some of HIS property he felt could not be retrieved any other way (it's legal in Texas.)

But honestly it's not my job to risk my life to save someone elses property. Maybe if it was a real good friend I would block the driveway while the cops were coming and if they attacked me, well I would defend myself, but I sure don't go a-shooten just to rub out a couple of thiefs (deserving of it or not.)

We will see how this is played out. Since the old man is the only eye witness, and if the forensic match, well all he has to worry about is the civil courts.

rb4browns
November 27, 2007, 10:51 PM
[QUOTE]A. Why don't you go back to wherever you came from.

===> LOL, I moved here from California. I'm not going anywhere.

There is obviously a reason you opted to come to Texas. We're independent down here, don't take crap off criminals and don't give a rat's ass what the Fourth Estate thinks of us. If we listened to all the other whiners in the press and liberal, crime-loving/sheep-pack states, we'd be in a real world of hurt.

===> Well the previous tough guy poster seems to care a great deal about what the anti-gunners think, take a look at his post in response to mine. I moved to Texas to be in a state in part to be in a state where the government would not prevent me from defending my family from predators. I did not move here to play Rambo in defense of the neighbor's baubles and knick knacks.

B. A criminal is a criminal whether he is in my house or my neighbor's house. I grew up in the country and we watched out for each other. Some bum (nowadays known as "economically displaced homeless victims) broke into a neighbor's house or barn, his life expectancy was lowered drastically. And if the DA and Sheriff wanted to keep their jobs, they damn sure no-billed whoever defended their property or their neighbor's property.

===> I never said said the guy breaking in to the house wasn't a criminal. I simply said he did not deserve the death penalty delivered at the hands of the neighbor. I too believe in watching out for the neighbors. That doesn't mean I'm gonna rush in to a gun fight to save their stuff. You want your kid to visit you in a cemetary because you laid down your life for the neighbor's TV or silverware? You go right ahead tough guy.

We're starting to go to hell in a handbasket because of all you bleeding heart "ain't no property worth defending at the point of a gun" attitudes.

===> You and I put a different value on our neighbor's TV, silverware, etc. To each their own. I'm not going to get in a gunfight over things that can be easily replaced and which don't even belong to me in the first place. Got a problem with that? Then I suggest you keep your redneck butt out of Dallas, you might not like the guy you end up living next door to. And thank you btw, you are the first person to ever call me a bleeding heart. I take it as a compliment!

Tell you what, hoss. My property is MY property and I'll defend it. You (generic "you") want it? Go get a damned job, save your paychecks and EARN IT! Same goes for my neighbors' property. They watch out for me and we watch out for them.

===> Yee haw! :D

In the old days when everyone did that, we didn't have much crime.

===> In the old days folks married their 1st cousins and didn't have many teeth either. What's your point?

rb4browns
November 27, 2007, 10:57 PM
Whoever made the official decision that killing someone in defense of property was an immoral decision anyway? Isn't that a decision to be left to the individual? We already know that you are covered legally (at least in Texas) so all that is left is the moral question. I dont see any problem in taking someones life to defend my property. Am I a psychopath? No. A sociopath? No. Am I some sick, twisted individual with no respect for humanity? No. Far from it. People have the right to be born into this world as free beings. You have to EARN the right to continue living that way. One of the fastest ways to prove that you are incapable of doing so is to commit criminal acts against your fellow man. There is a lot less separating people from animals than some of us like to realize. Just like a dog that bites its owner or mauls a child, no matter how "innocent" or "harmless" it seems to be, these people need to be removed from circulation, so to speak. I dont see how you can sit here and say that even though these guys were stealing from another mans home, they didnt deserve what happened to them? If you play with fire, you might get burned. Whether its a singe to the finger or a full-body, skin melting burn, you had it coming from the start. Some of you who think you are dyed-in-the-wool supporters of our rights turn out to be an outright embarrassment with the fence-riding and finger pointing behavior that goes on. Two very bad men are dead, since when do we side with them in any way, shape or form?

I doubt you are a sociopath or a psychopath, but you do sound like a mall ninja with your melodramatic, tough guy rants. If you are trying to be profound with your cliches, it's not working.

A guy stealing from another guy's home does not deserve the death penalty delivered at the hands of a neighbor who was inside his own home on the phone with authorities when he made a decision to proactively engage the burglars. I understand you do not see that, but that's not my problem.

RJay
November 27, 2007, 11:05 PM
This posting is getting very interesting and I bet it will be locked soon. So far from what I've read there are a group that wants to wait for all the evidence to come in , but the fact he stated he was was going to "kill them" and confronted the bad guys and "killed them" against the police dispatches advise, looks bad for Mr. Horn. Then there is the group that believes that Mr. Horn was right in killing them, and should have hunted down their mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and pet dogs and shotgunned them also. Wow, one thing for sure, the next time I'm traveling through Texas, if I have a flat tire I'm going to keep driving on the rim until I'm over the state line. Just in case that second group is out cruising in their pickup trucks, looking to see if they can add another notch on their shotgun stock. I can not believe every one in Texas is kill crazy ( no offence ). Any way, I'm out of here, Vaya con Dios:p

rb4browns
November 27, 2007, 11:09 PM
This posting is getting very interesting and I bet it will be locked soon. So far from what I've read there are a group that wants to wait for all the evidence to come in , but the fact he stated he was was going to "kill them" and confronted the bad guys and "killed them" against the police dispatches advise, looks bad for Mr. Horn. Then there is the group that believes that Mr. Horn was right in killing them, and should have hunted down their mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and pet dogs and shotgunned them also. Wow, one thing for sure, the next time I'm traveling through Texas, if I have a flat tire I'm going to keep driving on the rim until I'm over the state line. Just in case that second group is out cruising in their pickup trucks, looking to see if they can add another notch on their shotgun stock. I can not believe every one in Texas is kill crazy ( no offence ). Any way, I'm out of here, Vaya con Dios

LOL, it's not so bad here. I think its easier for people to be tough guys on a computer than in real life. It's the ones who don't need to post these silly "Yeah he should have shot him 12 times and run 'em over with the truck 'cause that's how we do it round here and that's his right because his feet were in the fire and he was gonna get burned" that you gotta worry about :eek:

Capt Charlie
November 27, 2007, 11:11 PM
This posting is getting very interesting...
Interesting? I'd say that's an understatement when I need a heat shield just to get near my computer screen!

...and I bet it will be locked soon.
Ya think? Sure 'nuff; you're right! :mad: