Source:
http://www.reporternews.com/news/201...er=yahoo_feeds
Timeline:
http://www.reporternews.com/news/201...artner=popular
The parties:
Driver A is the 40-something son of a prominent local family. Loves his pickup truck. No criminal record.
Driver B is the 21yr old son of a local reporter. Has two kids by his girlfriend, going to community college to pursue a criminal justice major. No criminal record. Driving a Mustang.
Facts reported by at least 2 eyewitnesses so far:
Driver A is following Driver B, who has his girlfriend as a passenger. Driver B taps on his brakes. As they come to a gas station Driver B stops for a car turning into the station. Driver A passes him and pulls in front of him at the intersection a short distance away. Both men get out of their cars. There is yelling between the two men and Driver B displays a pistol. Both men get back into their cars. Driver A reverses his pick up truck into Driver B's Mustang and floors it, pushing the Mustang up over a 4-5' wide grass median and into oncoming traffic. Driver A exits his truck and as Driver B exits his vehicle, Driver A shoots him in the head killing him.
I thought this incident was interesting because from a legal perspective (see
Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code regarding self-defense, both men felt they were justified in claiming self-defense but neither one has a strong case for it. When Driver B first displays the pistol, there is no evidence of an imminent threat of death or serious injury. However, Driver B does not have to meet that standard since threatening use of deadly force is considered the same as using non-deadly force under Texas law.
Some eyewitness reports allege Driver A fired a shot after exiting the car a second time; but at this point, Driver B will have a difficult time arguing his actions in ramming the Mustang did not provoke/escalate the fight.
From a tactics standpoint, it seems to me that both men lose a lot of important legal protections the moment they step out of their vehicles. In Texas, Castle Doctrine extends to the vehicle. By stepping outside the vehicle, both drivers gain a little mobility (and separation from loved ones for Driver B) but they make it much harder to clearly identify the aggressor.
Would either Driver have been better off just staying in the vehicle in the first confrontation?