(TX) Police: Father Protects Daughter, Shoots Alleged Intruder

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Drizzt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,647
Location
Moscow on the Colorado, TX
Police: Father Protects Daughter, Shoots Alleged Intruder

CANUTILLO, Texas -- The El Paso County Sheriff's Office investigated a shooting in Canutillo Saturday morning.

It happened on the 800 block of Anthony Road early Saturday morning, when deputies said a 21-year-old man attempted to cause damage or commit a theft.

The woman who lived in the home called her father, who lives a few houses away.

He showed up with a handgun and confronted the 21-year old outside.

Deputies said the father fired a warning shot first, and fired at the man when the 21-year old charged after him.

The 21-year-old was hit in the chest.

He was taken to the hospital.

Deputies have not released the names of anyone involved.

They said charges are pending.

http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/14029873/detail.html
 
boredelmo wrote:

Charges are pending what?
Click to expand...

probably aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. shooting someone for pretty much just trespassing may not pass muster with a Grand Jury. it appears uncertain if the man was attempting theft or criminal mischief, or was up to something else.
 
I don't know about that, Spreadfire Arms. If the guy did charge the father, then that could possibly change things.

Anyway, don't all shootings go before a Grand Jury in TX as a matter of state law?
 
Not enough info. Then again, depending on exactly what the guy was doing AT THE DAUGHTER's HOUSE, and whether or not the guy drew down before the perp became violent, threatened the father, etc, the guy could be entirely in the clear. Hard to say either way at this point.
 
Sounds like the guy was up to no good, but more facts are needed in this one.

Warning shots are a bad idea in MOST cases. There are some cases when they have deterred the situation and nobody had to get shot. If you shoot one, however, you never know how that person is going to react. Case in point the kid charged. Dumb kid. Dead kid.
 
Some states, such as Florida, have mandatory sentencing for discharging a firearm in public.....even if it's meant as a warning shot.

Discharging your weapon to stop instances of petty theft, vandalism, property crimes or other non-life threatening events (that fall outside of "forcible felony" and/or "castle doctrine" definitions), will not fly well with most LEO's or prosecuting attorneys.

The BG you are after may indeed end up in jail, but you stand a good chance of joining him......and staying there long after he gets out.

My own rule is to keep my firearms tucked away and out of sight unless an in-my-face and imminent "forcible felony" situation would exist.....and my life, or the life of another, would be in immediate jeopardy.

Specific definitions vary by state, but in Florida the definition of a "forcible felony" is generally any felony crime which involves the existence of two additional factors:

1. An act involving violence, or the immediate threat of violence, must exist.

2. That violence, or immediate threat of violence, must be directed towards a person or persons and not merely property.

Florida law also includes treason, arson, aircraft piracy and aggravated stalking in this definition, but those are definitions I would not like to interpret on my own, so I'll stick to the existence of violence part.
 
Said shot, not killed.

Charges could be pending against the 21 yo.

I don't agree that warning shots are always a bad idea. Depends on the circumstance.

I'd be interested in knowing if the person shot knows the guy's daughter.

K
 
Some states, such as Florida, have mandatory sentencing for discharging a firearm in public.....even if it's meant as a warning shot.
Click to expand...

+1 that was the first thing I though of when they said charges pending.
Course, from the way the article was written there could be any number for charges (either against the shooter or the shootee).
 
Charges are probably pending to the intruder, since he did not die.

Warning shots are dangerous, but in front of a grand jury, could look like you gave the scum a chance to stand down. Also, most people would have to agree that if you fired a warning shot and the guy still came after you, he wasn't firing on all cylinders.
 
Warning shots are dangerous, but in front of a grand jury, could look like you gave the scum a chance to stand down.
Click to expand...

That's sort of what I always thought.

The legal eagles on THR however think differently. I'm certainly no lawyer so I don't know but the other argument goes that if you fire a warning shot you are admitting that you didn't believe deadly force was necessary. Personally I think that's goofy but I've heard the argument a lot.

I'd love to hear from a real lawyer on how they think that would play out.

Seems a stretch to me but who knows.
 
Last edited:
Some states, such as Florida, have mandatory sentencing for discharging a firearm in public.....even if it's meant as a warning shot.
Click to expand...

Let's say a man was on his own land. Is that discharging a firearm in public?

Back to the case at hand. Assuming the 21yo was about to commit a crime like theft or was about to cause some damage, why is it a bad thing to send a message? Why should a warning shot cause the shooter any legal grief? I know how the laws generally read, and they are ridiculous. This notion that you should/have to let somebody complete their misdeeds so long as there is no immediate threat to life is ludicrous and dare I say another example of the weak-kneed sheep-like society we now have.

Dammit, there should be no legal repercussions for defending my property. Unfortunately, the law says otherwise, and it's clear that the majority of people in this country are a-ok with this. I guess I gotta play along.

Oh well. Further down the path we go.
 
She had time to call her father, but not 911. I think there may be more to this story that isn't in the papers. How old is she? Is this a current or ex-boyfriend? What if: I'm the 21 y/o, "my girlfriend and me were having an argument, all of a sudden her father show up with a gun, shoots at me, misses the first shot, I try to disarm him (remember flee from a knife, charge a gun?) and he shoots me." You know the statement "attempted to cause damage or commit a theft" is kind of vague.
 
. . . who would get there sooner.

She made the first call to the person who would get there sooner.
Click to expand...
Well, yes.

While true, I'm thinking that, in her shoes (assuming [!] for the moment that this guy is a stranger), after I've called Dad and told him I'm being attacked, I'm calling 911 and telling them I'm under attack, and that my dad is on the way over to assist -- and he's armed.

For whatever reason, when "armed" makes it into the call, the black-n-whites typically show up sooner (leastwise, around here).

In any case, the call to 911 essentially "legitimizes" the action.

Of course, if the "assailant" is already known to the girl and her father, that changes the complexion of the event quite a bit.

Shootin' folks you know is a bit different from shootin' strangers.
 
I'm certainly no lawyer so I don't know but the other argument goes that if you fire a warning shot you are admitting that you didn't believe deadly force was necessary.
Click to expand...
I don't think so in this case. The way it reads it appears that he fired a warning shot first, (Possibly after telling him to leave the property and getting a negative response) and then shot CM when he was rushed as a response to the warning shot.
 
I think the warning shot could get him in more trouble than the COM shot. Hard to argue self-defense for a warning shot, since it's not intended to eliminate the threat.

Also, calling dad and then calling 911 is a good recipe for getting dad shot by police. "Hello, 911? There's a man outside threatening me." Cops roll up and see a guy with a gun outside...
 
Some states, such as Florida, have mandatory sentencing for discharging a firearm in public......


That's a new one. What paragraph of 790 says that???
 
Texas? At night? A father?
My suspicion is that charges are pending on the intruder. They are just waiting until he leaves the hospital. They don't want the county to be responsible for his hospital bill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
(GA) Father Shoots, Injures Intruder
Replies
17
Views
922
RangerHAAF
RangerHAAF
4
  • Locked
Police: Homeowner Kills Alleged Intruder
Replies
16
Views
1K
45R
4
D
  • Locked
(TX) Man Shot in Home Break-In
Replies
3
Views
423
beaucoup ammo
B
A
  • Locked
12-Year-Old Shoots Alleged Intruder to Save Grandmother
Replies
7
Views
718
4v50 Gary
4v50 Gary
D
  • Locked
(KY) Hall of fame hunter shoots alleged intruder
Replies
11
Views
1K
Preacherman
P
Back
Top