CHL carrier kills man

[Mad Chemist]

This doesn't seem to make very much sense.

As the victim got out of his seat to confront his soon to be killer, the Murderer said, **** it, dropped his knife and pulled out a .357 magnum and shot the victim in the back as he was running toward the front. So in defense of the Victim and the DA, this thug who happened to have a license to carry a weapon, was looking for an opportunity for someone to make his day and carried it out with this senseless murder.

This statement fails the smell test.

So said victim was how far away from his assailant?
Did he see the knife?
Was he attempting to disarm the assailant?
How long did this episode take to unfold?
Exactly when did he change directions? Was it mid-course or did he actually lay hands on the shooter?
I'm sure the investigators would be even more interested in the details than I am.

If you are worth your word and actually have pertinent info regarding the case, then you should probably keep your mouth shut so that you can be a more credible witness at the trial.

If this is a fabrication and you are playing games with other peoples' mifortunes, then you are the lowest kind of low.

JH

 

[XavierBreath]

My version of the story is only known by the DA because I could not stick around to talk to detectives because I had a plane to catch. The officer you see me talking to took my phone number and Homicide detective said it was ok for me to leave.

I find it odd that officers would let a witness to a murder leave because he had a plane to catch.

 

[Don Lu]

Im very surprised at how many people have been defending the CCW holder or creating faux situations where he could be justified in what he did.. We never really know all the facts but it seems like noone wanted to give any credence to the original article and all of a sudden you cant believe what you read and see on TV. Its Ironic b/c everyday on THR, people use an article or news clip to start a thread. I dont think I have ever seen such a quick judgement made opposing the article without any tangible reason to do so. Its just strange..I agree w/the post about calling a spade a spade. Surprisingly people here have almost been looking for excuses for the CCW guy and creating scenarios about why the victim probably deserved it... some of the reaction to this thread makes me very uncomfortable.

 

[gunsmith]

taison

no disrespct meant but having been on this board a few years I have
seen it is very common for trolls to comment that they knew the victim or were at the scene of a shooting that is being discussed.
If you were a witness then you would have been told not to discuss the case, that is why I am having a hard time accepting your story.
If I am wrong please accept my apology.

 

[romma]

So said victim was how far away from his assailant?
Did he see the knife?
Was he attempting to disarm the assailant?
How long did this episode take to unfold?

Sigh, Were is Perry Mason when you need him? Sorry, trying to inject humor here because this thread could use some... These are of course fair questions. As far as some colorful scenerios imagined, Wow!

 

[Tinmancr]

wow..

wow this is a fun little quandary, a man pulls a knife and is shot in a crowd?
Who has time to draw when a knife is be wielded in front of them?
Up here any law abiding citizen can carry no questions asked, since this was enacted I haven't heard of many more shootings than we normally have.
Mostly drunks, druggies, angry lovers.
So if you think in this state with so many gun nuts most who can carry, I personally have a couple times walking downtown.
I would actually prefer the knife in close quarters, and would not try to pull a gun in this situation.
I always carry a knife and am quite good with it "best multitool" in my opinion.
Oh yeah and we all react different to a given set of events.
Most people either assume or know kill someone will change them.
Mentally, or by way of repercussions it will change something.
I have had a story of personal defense told to me a couple of times from an old wino who happens to be fairly crazy.
He had to kill or be killed, a gun in his face and 10+ years later in a drunken or sober state he still is trying to justify it to himself.
The court justified it as self defense, but he still wasn't sure deep down

 

[computerguysd]

Out of who knows how many hundreds of thousands, probably millions, of carry permits there will be some cases where a clean criminal record and mental history can't screen out someone who later breaks the law or has some kind of breakdown.

What happened here? Who knows; literally the jury is still out on this case (maybe it's not even assembled), yet.

However this case turns out, it doesn't indicate in any way that CCW permit holders are any danger to the general public. The statistics for safe handling of firearms and crimes prevented by CCW holders will not be impacted if this particular case turns out to be an isolated case of poor judgement by someone that qualified to have a permit and then later demonstrated poor judgement.

 

[Jim March]

Folks, we don't have to worry about whether Taison is lying or not.

According to him, the deceased was shot in the back.

Handgun ammo always gives a very clear indication as to which wound is entrance and which (if any) is exit. So that part of his statement is either true or false, and can't be faked.

If it's true, the shooter is going to spend a looooong time in jail, as he should if Taison's story is at least broad-strokes accurate. Per Taison, the deceased was an idiot and a hot-head, but the shooter was indeed a murderer. Sounds a lot like somebody who had been attacked/abused in the past and was on hair-trigger alert for another bully.

Do I know anything for sure? Nope. And I won't post to this thread again. The truth will come out, esp. regarding direction of bullet travel and the direction of travel of the deceased.

(Sidenote: medium-power-or-above rifle ammo can make wound direction ID tricky if it blows out huge chunks - but a 357 just can't do that.)

 

[Taison]

Eyewitness

I will in summation try to answer some of the questions concerning my posts. First I must say it is funny how we disclaim everything written in the Houston Chronicle concerning this case except the claim that this suspect had a permit to carry. Why are we quick to believe the media concerning this fact when it has not yet been established as truth? I would also ask that you re-read my first post because some of the questions asked are answered in it. About leaving the scene I waited for, what seemed like forever, for the police to arrive and I was surprised the paramedics arrived before the police. There is a police station no more than a mile from the scene but it took them five minutes to arrive. When the police arrived I talked with a Sergeant who wrote my statement down. The officer told me I would have to wait for the Homicide detective before I could leave. I told him I could not miss this flight so he called homicide on the phone and he gave me permission to leave. I was told he would call me on my cell the next day but he never did. I called the DA handling the case the following Monday and spoke with her. She took my information and said she would contact me later.
To answer the question concerning the knife. If you empty your mind of what you read in the paper and re-read my first post you will see that it was the shooter who had the knife not the victim. The Houston Chronicle was relating two versions of the incident in its article titled "Knife threat revealed in shooting." The D.A.'s version and the Suspects version. The suspect said that the victim pulled a knife on him but the D.A.'s version which must have been obtained from witnesses said that the Suspect pulled a knife first. This information came out during the suspects probable cause hearing. The Houston Chronicle with its bad reporting was wrong to entitle the article, "Knife threat revealed in shooting." As far as me giving too much detail of a pending murder case, let me say if you read the news articles concerning this shooting or watch the news videos you will see that I have not disclosed anything the media has not already reported. There were a few questions concerning the shooting that I do not feel at liberty to answer. I am sure these questions are out of curiousity but I do not feel it proper for me to go into such detail about the incident on this site. But I will say this, I checked the victims vitals with a nurse after the shooting and observed his wounds and it appeared to me that the bullet hit the victim in the right side of his back, traveled across his body, went through his chest and lodged in his left arm. Is a .357 caliber bullet capable of doing this? I am speculating this because the victim had a flesh wound on the inside of his left arm. This is only speculation please do not qoute this as fact. I initially posted on this site to clear up the speculations and cut through all the rhetoric but as in most situations people will discredit truth if it contradicts there own presuppositions. I hope this post helped clear up some of the confusion.

 

[Taison]

Eyewitness

Mad Chemist,

The victim may not have seen the knife, but he definitely saw the gun and started running toward the front of the bus as soon as he saw it. I am not sure at what point the bullet hit him. I will not answer the other questions.

 

[GaryL]

But I will say this, I checked the victims vitals with a nurse after the shooting and observed his wounds and it appeared to me that the bullet hit the victim in the right side of his back, traveled across his body, went through his chest and lodged in his left arm. Is a .357 caliber bullet capable of doing this? I am speculating this because the victim had a flesh wound on the inside of his left arm. This is only speculation please do not qoute this as fact.

Thanks for the info. People tend to be skeptical when they've been lied to a few times (as most of us have).

A 357 mag is fairly powerful. There are a number of factors that determine the path a bullet will take, including density of the materials it travels through and what it encounters first. It is quite possible for your observations to be quite accurate in that respect.

 

[Coronach]

THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH MEDIA REPORTS. THEY ARE NOT ACCURATE. I HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR ABOUT 4 YEARS NOW IN REFERENCE TO LEO SHOOTINGS, BUT WE CONTINUE TO BLATHER ON FOR 4+ PAGES ABOUT HOW THIS PROBABLY HAPPENED AND HOW THAT WENT DOWN AND HOW WE ONCE KNEW SOMEONE WHO HAD A ROOMATE IN COLLEGE HAVE THE EXACT SAME THING HAPPEN TO HIM AND THIS IS ALL A BUNCH OF . MAYBE NOW THAT IT IS A CCW PERMIT HOLDER WE WILL ALL FALL BACK AND REMEMBER THE FIRST RULE OF EVALUATING MEDIA REPORTS:

MEDIA REPORTS ARE NOT ACCURATE. AT ALL.

PERIOD. FULL STOP. THE END.

THEY'RE WORTHLESS.

WAIT FOR THE TRIAL.

Thank you,

Mike

PS Yes, I'm aware I was "yelling". I was actually yelling. THRers, take the hint.

 

[MechAg94]

Charge dropped in case of Metro bus shooting

I came across this doing another search. I remembered the facts in the original discussion were somewhat confusing so I figured I would post this. Sounds like things weren't as bad for the shooter as some thought.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4862410.html

By KEVIN MORAN
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
A murder charge against a man accused of fatally shooting another man on a Metro bus in March has been dropped, according to court records.

A Harris County grand jury Friday considered the evidence in the case and declined to indict Garrett William Mallot, 24, court records show.

Mallot was alleged to have shot Otis James Francis, 31, after the two were involved in an argument on the bus in the 11700 block of Westheimer shortly before noon on March 28, police said at the time.

Mallot had been free on a $50,000 bond posted shortly after the incident, court records show.

Police said Mallot had a license to carry a concealed handgun when he shot Francis on the bus carrying about 30 passengers.

Houston police spokesman John Cannon said today that investigators noted in preliminary written reports that Mallot pulled a knife during the verbal exchange with Francis before Mallot pulled his gun and shot Francis.

Prosecutors and Investigators who worked on the case were not available for comment today.

Francis was black and Mallot is white but police said there was no indication that race was involved in the incident.

Mallot was still on the bus when police arrived and his hands were raised in surrender as the police boarded the bus. Paramedics had the gun Mallot used.

Metro Police Chief Tom Lambert said at the time that the shooting was a rare occurrence on the transit system that carries about 330,000 people a day on 1,300 buses.

Metro crime statistics show there were no other killings on Metro vehicles in 2006 or 2007. There were 15 aggravated assaults between October 2005 and September 2006 on buses and at Metro facilities. There were eight aggravated assaults reported between October and March.

[email protected]

 

[XavierBreath]

Surprise!

HOUSTON -- A man will not face charges in connection with a fatal shooting on board a Metro bus, KPRC Local 2 reported. A grand jury decided Garret Mallot, 24, defended himself when he shot Otis Francis, 31, during a confrontation on the No. 82 bus on Westheimer Road near Royal Oaks Club Drive on March 28. Mallot accidentally brushed up against Francis and got into verbal argument, officials said.

"Mr. Mallot, being significantly physically smaller than the victim, pulled out a knife," Mallot's attorney Alvin Nunnery said. "When he recognized that the deceased was still continuing toward him in an aggressive manner, already announcing his intention to hurt him physically, he (Mallot) pulled out his gun and he shot him one time."

Several witnesses testified that Mallot was defending himself. Mallot did not testify. Mallot had been charged with murder, but the grand jury decided that there was not sufficient probable cause. Francis had a lengthy criminal past and had been arrested on charges of felony assault of a peace officer and fighting on two Metro buses.

"I think he has a history of kind of bullying and intimidating people," Nunnery said. "I think the grand jury rightfully took that into consideration in assessing the entire situation."

Link

Interesting snippets from the video at this link: Garrett Mallot will retain his right to keep and bear arms. Mallot was represented by a court appointed attorney, Alvin Nunnery. Otis "Magic" Francis had a history of two assaults on Metro buses, and one assault on a peace officer. Francis also served time for narcotics charges. In 2003, Francis was charged with assault with a deadly weapon, but he, too was "no-billed" by a Grand Jury.

 

[romma]

Good for the guy defending himself,, and good for us all. Of course there won't be too much in the media about this persons vindication I am sure.

 

[MechAg94]

Well, the article above was in the media. Not big news though.

 

[Pushrod]

Wow! I'm not sure I agree with the Grand Jury on this one. If what the witness Taison said is true, then it wasn't a good shoot. So either Taison is full of it or the Grand Jury was filled with a bunch of morons.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Somehow, Taison's eyewitness account doesn't seem to work, or his story for being able to leave to catch a plane.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

One of two things

It seems one of two things happened.

Either:

the prosecutor and grand jury concluded the bad guy "needed killing" and there was no point prosecuting the CCW dude,​

or

the prosecutor and grand jury found no evidence that the CCW dude broke the law and/or they didn't think a prosecution would fly.​

In any case, it seems justice was served.

 

[wolfman01]

Somehow, Taison's eyewitness account doesn't seem to work, or his story for being able to leave to catch a plane.

I agree. Investigators are not going to give one whit if an eyewitness has a plane to catch. Taison would have missed his flight - period. The generous use of catch phrases in his original post are also extremely damaging to his credibility. I'll give the grand jury the benefit of the doubt in this case, over this particular poster.