Assess this recent in-the-news defensive shooting incident (Houston)

[The Night Rider]

Leaving aside The Fact that the bad guy was leaving, back turned, having not fired a shot at that point in time, the patron shot him four times.

Objection, Your Honor the witnesses stating sheer speculation as fact

 

[Kleanbore]

Objection, Your Honor the witnesses stating sheer speculation as fact

Of course, the prosecutor would be allowed to say those things in his opening or closing statements..

I believe that the first four shots were justified, and very possibly, some after those.

But not prudent, fired from that position.

 

[wayneinFL]

Yeah, the customer with the concealed gun looked for all the world like he probably doesn't carry all the time. Way too much "managing the gun" while sitting there; patting it, fishing for it, fumbling. He's lucky the robber either didn't know the signs, wasn't paying attention or was too high to notice.

It looked to me like it may have been in the pocket of his jacket, and inaccessible until he flipped through the jacket several times to locate it. That had to be frustrating. Like he could feel his full size gun in there somewhere, but couldn't find the pocket.

I had a discussion about placing fire extinguishers in company vehicles. I kept mine accessible, and was dinged for it in an audit. We were required to keep them in the back door, behind the regular vehicle lock, and a puck lock. So not only did you have to run to the back of the vehicle in an emergency, but fumble with two separate keys to access an emergency item. Brilliant.

 

[Scrapiron45]

Drawing a weapon from your everyday carry while rising from a table would make a very good dry fire exercise.
Tables/booths in restaurants are often awkward to stand up in quickly due to space limitations.

 

[old lady new shooter]

"Validated"? The criminal justice system can do just about anything, and whatever it does will teach us no more than the flip of a coin.

Yes, there are lessons here. Some people may need to pay attention to the discussion. Telegraphing that he was armed by fidgeting with the gun...firing from a seated position without regard to what was behind the target...that eight shot...touching the robber's gun....

Those would be pointed out in good FoF training, and we would learn not to do them.

I was under the impression he stood up to fire.

 

[jmorris]

Well, those are two alternatives. How about moving? That's a basic tactic covered in many training courses.

He did just that, as the shootie moved, he followed, closed distance with I would assume more accurate fire and didn’t stop until he was down. Actually quiet a bit after that, from what I can see.

I am pretty sure chance had a lot to do with it but here he’s aimed with one foot off the ground in process of exiting booth.

And one where he is higher but still not standing, probably past back guy and still a bit high.

Now, it is much more clear that he is well past the “no shoot” back there and he’s now on his feet and getting somewhere he has options other than sitting there (out of the booth).

Very narrow margins for sure, if you watch the video here, https://twitter.com/shanermurph/status/1611798827849113600

IF the sound is somewhat synced I think he hit the video poker game right by the guy on the #2 shot.

You have to watch the video to see the red circled screen change though. Something alters it’s state and not the other two to the left.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

That is pure speculation as nobody genuinely knows the robber's subsequent plans.
We now know the robber had murdered a person before, so he was unpredictable.

This is not the point, and an extremely dangerous one to take in the realm of using deadly force. Unless one's life goal is to end up with a free ride in the prison system, that is.

You make the decision to use, or not to use, deadly force on the EXISTING circumstances as you know them to be AT THAT TIME. To use deadly force simply because "nobody genuinely knows the robber's subsequent plans" is the height of folly. You make that decision based on the totality of the existing circumstances which, mind you, are going to be judged by others after the fact under the "reasonable person" standard.

This isn't just a case of shooting someone who had their back turned and was leaving. I conceded in my prior post that it might indeed be possible to successfully endure a trial if that were all it was.

But it was not.

The biggest problem with this shooting is what happened AFTER the first four shots.

The bad guy went face down HARD and STAYED that way. Then the patron approached and not only shot him four more times in the back, but paused, did some additional assessment on a face-down, unmoving person, and shot him again.

Knowing more about the bad guy's history after the fact has absolutely NO BEARING on the actions that took place in this shooting.

The fact that the bad guy might be judged "unpredictable" in light of such knowledge likewise has absolutely NO BEARING in this case. You and I can look at each other and say the same thing simply because we don't know each other.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Objection, Your Honor the witnesses stating sheer speculation as fact

Kind of difficult to make this point stick, since it's in the video.

 

[jmorris]

Kind of difficult to make this point stick, since it's in the video.

I think that was his point, for anyone to say what the dead guy was going to do before he was shot is speculation. All we can say with any degree of certainty is what he did that we can see.

Unless there is audio where he is saying “ya’ll have a good day, I’m out of here.” The only thing we can say for sure is he was headed back towards the door.

If that alone = he is leaving, he shouldn’t have even been there to get killed. Because he had already taken the money from the guy by the jukebox and was heading for the door here.

We now know that wasn’t the end of it because the guy is still futzing with his pistol and the rest of the video proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he didn’t leave despite already taking money and heading back towards the entrance/exit.

 

[jmorris]

From a strategy/tactics perspective, anyone notice he was the only one to throw his money on the floor?

 

[WTBguns10kOK]

Another side note. While our Patron Saint of Taquerias was conducting his defensive shooting, the guy across the room was just sitting there immobile. If you are in a robbery and are unarmed, you should always consider that gunfire may erupt. Even if you have a sidearm and may or may not utilize it, you should not allow yourself to suffer form normalcy bias and simply sit there. Thankfully our armed hero did a superb job controlling his fire, but the guy across the room certainly should have hit the deck.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

One assumption is "flight = guilt" and two the righteous person "stands his/her ground" and gets their side of the story on the record first.*

I see the robber with his (fake) gun approaching a patron in the upper left of the screen in video when the armed patron opens fire from his side.

The armed patron definitely hurt himself by leaving.


* I have been warned: Calm reflection and recollection in the face of a perceived lethal threat can't be expected, so watch what you say in the aftermath. Don't give a speech or meander.

 

[jmorris]

The armed patron definitely hurt himself by leaving.

* I have been warned: Calm reflection and recollection in the face of a perceived lethal threat can't be expected, so watch what you say in the aftermath. Don't give a speech or meander.

He might have saved himself too. Instead of telling police what was on his mind when he finished his drink and threw the cup on the dead guy, he had a few days with an attorney before making a statement and answering questions with law enforcement.

You can’t watch what you say much better than that.

Even something as minor as changing “Then I picked up the gun.” To “Then I picked up a gun.” Could be important, if he needs to provide defense for his actions.

 

[230RN]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_New_York_City_Subway_shooting

Lots of debate and polemic on this one, too. "Outcome" was a year in jail for possession. Gun was a Smith Model 38. There was a 43 million dollar judgement in a later civil trial.

Note the parallels with the present case.

Details must be examined in the link and in other articles thereon. "Strategies and Tactics" were pretty simple, but incident is listed here as an example of possible outcomes and the similarities in terms of racial overtones and public reaction, which apparently influenced the legal situation.

Nobody was killed, but one of the assailants was permanently disabled (resulting in the $43M judgement.)

Terry, 230RN

 

[The Night Rider]

Kind of difficult to make this point stick, since it's in the video.

All the video shows is the robber walking towards the door. You can guess at his motives. You can assume he's getting ready to leave but we don't know that.

We're never going to see the toxicology reports for the robber but for all we know he was baked out of his mind and capable of doing any irrational thing like starting to shoot everybody in there but that's speculation on my part.

All we know is that the robber was moving in the direction of the door

 

[luzyfuerza]

From a strategy/tactics perspective, anyone notice he was the only one to throw his money on the floor?

Good catch!

Its a pretty good bet that Defender didn't come up with that move in the moment. And he had thought ahead enough to have a gun on his person, and was determined to use it.

Something led him to think beforehand about what he would do in the case of an armed robbery. Have he or family members been robbed before? Did emotions from a prior event drive the extra shots?

But his preparation likely didn't include sound training, or training under stress...difficulty with the draw, immediately approaching the downed attacker, perhaps not seeing his backstop, the missed shot into the gaming screen and the two into the glass door, and shots 5-9 all tend to support this thought.

None of these are facts, just guesses. But food for us to think about.

 

[Kleanbore]

He did just that, as the shootie moved, he followed, closed distance with I would assume more accurate fire and didn’t stop until he was down.

What he did not do is move so that there were no innocents behind the target. Basic defensive shooting.

 

[GEM]

I have yet to see a trainer argue to close the distance for more accurate fire. There are scenarios where forward movement is part of the fight but not this one.
There is also quite a bit of discusson of the hidden draw. If you are bad guy in FOF, it's not that hard if you are alert to see someone fumbling for a gun. I read one 'expert' who said maybe the gun was unchambered. I have no idea about that.

To cut to the chase, the last shot will be the one that sinks him, if it comes to that. Hard to come up with a good 'tactical' reason. What will work for him is the emotional view of the jury. They may latch on to some basic 'tactical' BS from the defense to justify it. Basically, the jury will go with 'he deserved it' if the guy is not guilty or hung jury.

 

[230RN]

All the video shows is the robber walking towards the door. You can [Italics]guess[/Italics] at his motives. You can [Italics]assume[/Italics] he's getting ready to leave but we don't [Italics]know[/Italics] that.

I hope your italicized "know" works better than my underlined "know" a ways up-thread.

For a while I thought he was starting to turn toward the guy in the upper corner of the room just before the first shot. I thought that indicated he was not going to leave immediately. Looking at it again, it's not that clear.

Terry, 230RN

 

[Kleanbore]

What did the shooter do that was proper?

• He drew and fired when the robber was looking the other way
• He fired until the robber went down

What did he do that was not?

1. He carried his defensive weapon in a manner such that he had difficulty drawing it quickly and smoothly
2. He fired without moving to where there were no innocents behind his target, risking reckless homicide
3. He took the robber's weapon
4. He shot the man in the back of the head when he was down
5. He fled the scene

These may be good illustrations, but they should not be "lessons learned" for anyone who carries a defensive weapon.

For anyone who might not have figured these things out on their own, a bit of reading, or some defensive training and some instruction in use of force law, should make it crystal clear.

Will the shooter be charged and/or convicted or plead guilty? We cannot know, but it is important to realize that whichever way it goes, the same Grand Jury or trial jury could decide differently on a different day.

 

[The Night Rider]

What he did not do is move so that there were no innocents behind the target. Basic defensive shooting.

Might not have been possible

 

[Kleanbore]

Might not have been possible

I see no reason why it would not have been, but had the shooter so believed, the question would have been one of whether to risk reckless homicide or to not shoot at that moment.

 

[The Night Rider]

I see no reason why it would not have been, but had the shooter so believed, the question would have been one of whether to risk reckless homicide or to not shoot at that moment.

You know what they say, if it's stupid but it works it's not stupid

 

[The Night Rider]

I have to agree that the defender made some mistakes. There's definitely some things he could have done better. It's sheer speculation but he might even have been able to get out of the whole thing without firing a shot.

But the reality is none of the victims of the robbery were shot. Apparently none of the Defender's bullets left the Taqueria no innocent bystanders were hurt.

The reality is that gunfights are graded Pass/Fail and so far this one is looking like a Pass.

 

[WTBguns10kOK]

I have to agree that the defender made some mistakes. There's definitely some things he could have done better. It's sheer speculation but he might even have been able to get out of the whole thing without firing a shot.

But the reality is none of the victims of the robbery were shot. Apparently none of the Defender's bullets left the Taqueria no innocent bystanders were hurt.

The reality is that gunfights are graded Pass/Fail and so far this one is looking like a Pass.

In a thread bloated with grandstanding, this post is a very reasonable opinion. Every single (no exceptions) comment thread below news stories that I've seen has had full support for the armed hero. Very likely that his going home allowed time for the court of public opinion to sway toward him before the jury convenes. He simply did a great job overall.