The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 5, 2007, 08:17 AM   #26
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,582
Quote:
So, the neighbor fired THROUGH the door. Wonder if that's going to land him in hot water. He obviously has not been reading these boards, or he would have let the door get kicked in FIRST, THEN fired.
There is no Texas law that makes it illegal to shoot through a door. There is no Texas law that says you must identify your target.

Quote:
The question here is, was the keyboardist guy "committing an offense of unlawful entry" in this situation? If it turns out that the "offense of unlawful entry" doesn't take place until you've actually ENTERED, then there's a problem.
You have confused your tenses and action. Unlawful entry may not take place until you have entered, but the law reads "committing unlawful entry) and NOT "COMMITTED unlawful entry."

Was he committing unlawful entry? It does not actually matter whether he was or not in regard to the shooter. The shooter and his wife BELIEVED the Bohemian was trying to break into their home. Given the time of day (4:00 am) and what he was doing to the door, this is a reasonable belief. So they were in fear for their lives from a home invasion. This is specifically the type of thing the grand jury will be addressing. Was it reasonable to believe that somebody trying to kick down your door at 4:00 AM was trying to break into your home? If the answer is yes, then the use of lethal force is warranted under Texas law and no offense was committed. Also, was reasonable to believe the man and his wife in fear for their lives from the person trying to kick in their door at 4:00? If the answer is yes, then lethal force is warranted under Texas law. And lastly, was the Bohemian committing a crime at night on the property of the man and his wife? If yes, then lethal force is warranted under Texas law.

Quote:
Like I said I have a feeling they won't press charges here... but just barely.
No. They won't press charges because there was no crime committed by the shooter. It won't be a "just barely" situation. The acts of the Bohemian include at least 3 reasons that would allow the use of lethal force under Texas law. The grand jury will review the case as per Texas law and no bill the shooter for those reasons and they will feel justified in their decision because the Bohemian was acting in a violent manner having beaten his girlfriend, was drunk and acting irrationally, and continued his rampage at the neighbor's house. The grand jury will have no problem in believing rightfully that the actions taken by the shooter were prudent under the circumstances.

Quote:
I would have no qualms about shooting someone who's just entered the house, and I personally feel that once you've broken into somebody's house you have forfeited your right to live while you're inside, but this was very irresponsible IMHO.
Fortunately, your opinion doesn't govern Texas law. The nice thing about Texas law is that we don't have to wait until our homes have been successfully penetrated to defend ourselves. We get to stop people from committing successful unlawful entry into our homes.
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 08:39 AM   #27
yomama
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2006
Posts: 509
Actually from what I see they will press charges, and he will go to trial. The only way I am wrong is if Texas has changed law to state that it is up to the prosecution to prove the charges, instead of the home owner proving he was in the right.

In AZ, the new law states in self-defence cases, the prosecuter must show proof it was not a legal self defense.
yomama is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 09:35 AM   #28
Justme
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,066
Quote:
How many of you have lived in a place where you might be faced with a life or death decision at that time of the morning under that circumstance?
Pretty much all my life up until age 30. People who claim their "kill zone" starts at their property line scare me more than most criminals.

The reason they scare me is because this type of irresponsible attitude is the exact sort of ammunition the anti-gun crowd need to convince neutrals that gun owners are irresponsible hot heads. Irresponsible gun owners are the number 1 threat to my RTKBA.
Justme is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 12:06 PM   #29
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,582
Quote:
Actually from what I see they will press charges, and he will go to trial. The only way I am wrong is if Texas has changed law to state that it is up to the prosecution to prove the charges, instead of the home owner proving he was in the right.
Assuming the article is correct, this is a self defense shooting stopping illegal entry into a home by the owner. These often get summarily no-billed by the grand jury as such acts are perfectly legal in Texas.
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 03:09 PM   #30
CyberSEAL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2005
Posts: 161
I have an FN 5.7 just for shooting through doors...
CyberSEAL is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 03:32 PM   #31
W.E.G.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2007
Location: all over Virginia
Posts: 266
duplicate topic on TFL?

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=260450
W.E.G. is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 04:57 PM   #32
BobR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2000
Location: The Dry Side of WA
Posts: 561
Quote:
I have an FN 5.7 just for shooting through doors...
That is why I keep a loaded CZ52 handy, doors. Either house or auto.

bob
__________________
Sarcasm.....just one more service I offer.
BobR is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 05:00 PM   #33
Doggieman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 19, 2006
Location: San Diego, Calif.
Posts: 717
Double Naught Spy

you seem to be very emotional about this topic.
Doggieman is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 05:03 PM   #34
Doggieman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 19, 2006
Location: San Diego, Calif.
Posts: 717
Update

Man who shot musician may not be charged

By PAUL J. WEBER
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

DALLAS -- The shooting death of a member of Edie Brickell & New Bohemians appears to fall under state law permitting deadly force in self-defense, police said Tuesday.

A grand jury will decide whether the man who shot Jeffrey Carter Albrecht will be indicted, but Sgt. Larry Lewis said Dallas police aren't pursuing charges.

Police said Albrecht, 34, was inebriated and had been fighting with his girlfriend Monday before he was shot by a neighbor of the girlfriend.

The neighbor, who was not immediately identified, woke up around 4 a.m. to his wife screaming that someone was breaking into the house, police said. The neighbor yelled through the door for Albrecht to leave and then fired his handgun through the door, hitting Albrecht in the head.

"He yelled several verbal warnings, 'I'll shoot! I'll shoot!'," Lewis said. "From what we gather, he fired near the top of the door, hoping he would scare the person away."

The homeowner, whose identity wasn't released, was not arrested.

The shooting came two days after the enactment of a new state law, nicknamed the "Castle Doctrine," that gives Texans a stronger legal right to defend themselves with deadly force in their homes, cars and workplaces. Police and prosecutors, however, said the shooter appeared to be protected under an earlier law that allows a person to protect their property with deadly force to "prevent the other's imminent commission ... of criminal mischief during the nighttime."

"In an incident like that you're well within your rights under the old law, as well as the new one, to use deadly force," Dallas District Attorney Craig Watkins said.

Albrecht, who went by his middle name, had been a keyboard player for New Bohemians since 1999, according to the band's Web site. His death stunned friends and those who knew him in the North Texas music community.

"I am heart broken," Edie Brickell wrote in an e-mail to The Associated Press on Tuesday.

"We are all completely devastated by the news of Carter's death, and obviously still quite in shock," Brandon Aly, drummer for New Bohemians, wrote in another e-mail.

Albrecht played several times with Brickell's husband, Paul Simon. He also played with Texas musician Charlie Sexton, a renowned guitarist.

He also played keyboard and guitar and sang for Sorta, named in 2006 as the best local music act by the Dallas Observer.

Edie Brickell & New Bohemians scored a breakout hit in 1989 with "What I Am." They broke up for several years but regrouped and put out an album last year.
Doggieman is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 05:57 PM   #35
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,582
The police are pursuing any charges because there is no indication the home owner broke any laws. The grand jury has to review the case as per Texas law because a homicide was committed, but since no laws were broken, they really won't have any reason to do anything other than no-bill the case.

Of course, the new castle doctrine law just adds another layer of defense to the situation as well.
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 07:00 PM   #36
Avenger11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 15, 2007
Posts: 311
The homeowner was not charged, but according to Texas law it will go to a grand jury.It will be no billed and that will be the end of it. The musician was drunk, and had already assaulted his girlfriend. The police suspect that drugs were involved as well, pending autopsy results. Civil suits are also not allowed under the circustances.
The victims were elderly and scared to death, while this guy continued to kick the door , thinking his battered girlfriend was inside. He knew exactly what the target was, a madman trying to kick in his front door at 4:00 am. IMO he did just what he should have done. Stop the threat to his property and family. Those of you that would condemn him, obviously have not been in that situation.
Avenger11 is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 09:52 PM   #37
mattro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 28, 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 225
There has been several instances in Indiana where a homeowner has shot and killed an intruder thru their front door.

No charges have ever been brought, just the way it should be.

One instance was by a off duty leo.
__________________
My Battle Rifle has no sporting purpose.
mattro is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 03:27 PM   #38
Derius_T
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2004
Location: South West OHIO (boondocks)
Posts: 1,337
I don't know how this one sits with me. Too often, both as a professional, and as a civilian, we are taught to identify our target before firing. To absolutely NOT identify your target in ANY WAY (ie, even SEEING the target AT ALL) just seems to be very poor judgement. How much danger are you in if you are fully awake, have a gun in your hand, and are yelling at SOMEONE thru your door? Certainly the danger is minimal enough, at that point, to wait for the cops, or for the situation to defuse itself? I mean, he has not even done any damage to the door....not quite a life or death scenario, albiet a bit frightening for sure.....

I just can't swallow imminent mortal peril, while you are awake, alert, loaded gun in hand, pointed at door..... where's the life or death situation at this point? or the SELF defense? Maybe he was defending his door's right to be kicked.....
Derius_T is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 03:35 PM   #39
mattro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 28, 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 225
Maybe there was a window in the door that allowed identificaion. Maybe a window next to the door? Maybe he saw the perp with a weapon (gun). Maybe the perp had a gun and was yelling as soon as i get thru this door you are dead. Maybe it was a person that had previously threatened grave harm or maybe previously gravely harmed someone else that the victim knew about. Maybe the perp had a restraining order against them with extrememly violent tendencies and threats. Maybe the homeowner seen 2 men with masks and weapons run up to the door and started trying to kick it in.

I doubt if anyone is going to shoot thru a door without identifying the perp, and without feeling they are in immenent danger.
__________________
My Battle Rifle has no sporting purpose.
mattro is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 04:44 PM   #40
Justme
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,066
Quote:
I doubt if anyone is going to shoot thru a door without identifying the perp, and without feeling they are in immenent danger.
But that is exactly what appears to have happened, going by the news reports that we have. It worries me that this action is being so universally and uncritically accepted on this forum.
Justme is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 05:02 PM   #41
Thumper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 15, 2000
Location: Sugar Land, Tx
Posts: 1,507
Quote:
Quote:
I doubt if anyone is going to shoot thru a door without identifying the perp, and without feeling they are in immenent danger.

But that is exactly what appears to have happened, going by the news reports that we have. It worries me that this action is being so universally and uncritically accepted on this forum.
I'm confused. On which particular part of the news report do you base your assumption that the shooter was unable to identify the threat as a hysterical male attempting to kick in the door?
__________________
Ronnie- Proud Veteran, Neocon, Warmongering, Baby-Pincher
Thumper is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 05:21 PM   #42
JDSnead
Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2005
Location: Heart of Dixie
Posts: 66
Baton Rouge Halloween Killing

In answer to the question posed by Justme:

Wasn't it in Alabama where that guy shot a kid on halloween, because the kid went to the wrong house for a party? Obviously this is not the same situation. However, every time someone acts irresponsibly with a firearm all of us go under more scrutiny, I'd just as soon people didn't give the anti-gun crowd more ammunition.


No, it was in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The homeowner was acquitted in the criminal trial, but lost a civil suit for $650,000.

My .02
JS
JDSnead is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 05:46 PM   #43
Avenger11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 15, 2007
Posts: 311
Latest news from Dallas is that no charges will be filed.Besides the guy being drunk, he was also on smoking cessation drug, when combined with alcohol leads to bizzare behavior.
The reason the homeowners actions are accepted and not condemned on this forum, is because he was fully within his rights under Texas law. His wife called 911, he told the perp he had a gun and told him to stop and warned him several times. The perp continued with his assault on his property and they had every reason to believe they were in danger.
In Texas you no longer have to retreat in fear and wait until the BG enters your house.
The homeowner should be commended, not condemned.
Avenger11 is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 06:08 PM   #44
Avenger11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 15, 2007
Posts: 311
No ones giving the anti's any ammunition here, nor was he irresponsible in his action, he complied fully with current laws. I think the anti's would be poorly served in using this as a case for tougher gun laws. Do you not believe in the Castle Doctrine or are just jealous that Texas laws are more advanced than your states.
In addition, the local news just interviewed the parents of the deceased and they supported the actions of the homeowner, under those terrifying circumstances.
Avenger11 is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 10:11 PM   #45
mattro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 28, 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 225
It's pretty obvious to me the homeowner knew who the perp was. Probably from previous confrontations. He probably witnessed the young perp's violent behavior toward other people.

He didn't feel like waiting till the young strong hyped up punk got thru the door. Amen.
__________________
My Battle Rifle has no sporting purpose.
mattro is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 10:20 PM   #46
Justme
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,066
Sorry, I just don't see it. Shoot through an interior door in your house, fine, shoot through the front door at something you can't see, not so fine. I still don't get people on a firearms forum defending a guy who shot at something he couldn't even see. What if the guy wasn't alone? What if the guy was being chased by thugs? The possibilities are endless.

Say whatever you want, shooting at something you can't see is only an option when you don't have any other choice. The law in Texas may be on this guys side, so legally he's on solid ground. Morally and ethically is a different matter.
Justme is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 10:27 PM   #47
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,582
Actually, it was the back door. While the Bohemian might not have been visible through the door, the homeowners had seen the guy fairly well while he was beating on the windows. He moved from the windows to the door when they initially yelled at the guy.

Here is the 911 call.

http://www.myfoxdfw.com/myfox/pages/...Y&pageId=1.1.1

The 911 call is a pretty good example of what all sorts of things that you probably should not say to the cops or the 911 person.
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 10:52 PM   #48
Justme
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,066
Great link. Rather chilling call though. It sure sounded like the guy would have liked to have that bullet back. Maybe we should learn from his mistake rather than glorifying it?
Justme is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 10:59 PM   #49
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,577
What a messed up blurb on the video.
"When an East Dallas man heard someone trying to break down his back door, he fired his gun once high, trying to scare the intruder off. But the bullet accidentally killed his next door neighbor."
1. It wasn't his next door neighbor who was killed.
2. The shot killed the person who was trying to break down his door, the blurb makes it sound like the round travelled next door and accidentally killed his neighbor.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old September 6, 2007, 11:16 PM   #50
R1145
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 343
It's sad, but...

Quote:
...Morally and ethically is a different matter...
This was absolutely a justifable homicide, morally and ethically. Whether it was "right", can be debated, but hindsight is 20/20, and the homeowner can only be judged on what he knew at the time.

There might be similar cases where it would not be morally/ethically right, but in this instance, it appears (from the fragmentary information in the media) that the homeowner had a reasonable fear for his safety. Listening to the 911 call, you could hear the fear in the wife's voice. Four AM? Banging on windows and doors? This was not a "trick or treater".

Clearly, using lethal force should be a desparate, final thing. The poor man and his wife will have to live with the emotional trauma. However, I have no doubt that the proximate cause of the incident was the decedant's behavior, and that he was entirely responsible for his own tragic death.
R1145 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13457 seconds with 7 queries