Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
You are wrong all one need prove is fear. If the cops claim they identified themselves and he says they did not they need to provide evidence they did in fact identify themselves.Stand your ground does not require any such thing. All he has to prove is that he feared for his and his families life as unknown men broke into his house, meaning the cops now have to prove THEY identified themselves in a manner he would have known who they were.And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
You are ONE HUNDRED PERCENT wrong. Stand your ground is an affirmative defense, it's essentially a self defense claim. You must PROVE that you had legitimate fear. Which means you must PROVE you didn't know it was the police.
Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?Cops were crawling through his window, in Texas stand your ground includes firing on people outside your home. The person in the window and his buddies outside waiting to do the same. The Cops failed to identify themselves, they are at fault not the homeowner.I wasn't there but apparently you were. Fill us in on some details. On the first page I posted:
"According to the arrest affidavit, Guy admitted to police he shot at “a number of persons” outside of residence before being taken into custody Friday.
You say the cops are lying so what is your version and where specifically were you?
If you are shooting at suspected home invaders climbing in your window, that makes the others outside "guilty" by association.
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
They didn't identify themselves, because they never got fully inside. In raids, they routinely wait until they are inside.
on that I differ with you...they are totally different cases and also totally different states with their own laws, Texas with a liberal Stand your Ground law...And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?Cops were crawling through his window, in Texas stand your ground includes firing on people outside your home. The person in the window and his buddies outside waiting to do the same. The Cops failed to identify themselves, they are at fault not the homeowner.
If you are shooting at suspected home invaders climbing in your window, that makes the others outside "guilty" by association.
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
Stand your ground does not require any such thing. All he has to prove is that he feared for his and his families life as unknown men broke into his house, meaning the cops now have to prove THEY identified themselves in a manner he would have known who they were.And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
You are ONE HUNDRED PERCENT wrong. Stand your ground is an affirmative defense, it's essentially a self defense claim. You must PROVE that you had legitimate fear. Which means you must PROVE you didn't know it was the police.
And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?Cops were crawling through his window, in Texas stand your ground includes firing on people outside your home. The person in the window and his buddies outside waiting to do the same. The Cops failed to identify themselves, they are at fault not the homeowner.
If you are shooting at suspected home invaders climbing in your window, that makes the others outside "guilty" by association.
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
on that I differ with you...they are totally different cases and also totally different states with their own laws, Texas with a liberal Stand your Ground law...And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?If you are shooting at suspected home invaders climbing in your window, that makes the others outside "guilty" by association.
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
On top of this, someone KNOCKING ON YOUR Door, is NOT IN ANY WAY the same thing as BREAKING THROUGH your window....
there is no good reason for anyone to NOT reasonably think the people breaking through their window, at 5:30am, are anything other than burglars or robbers and or murderers......unless the police identified themselves clearly before he began shooting...this man should not be charged in this case, in my humble opinion, from what little facts I do know on it.
And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?If you are shooting at suspected home invaders climbing in your window, that makes the others outside "guilty" by association.
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
How does one prove they were afraid?
I wasn't there but apparently you were. Fill us in on some details. On the first page I posted:So SWAT is so efficient they can't even make it to somebody's window at 5:30 in the morning without them getting a drop on them.
If the guy said that he shot people outside the window, the cops just twisted his language. He probably said yea, the guy was a little bit outside the window (climbing in), and the cops twist that to make it sound like he was shooting them on the street.
"According to the arrest affidavit, Guy admitted to police he shot at “a number of persons” outside of residence before being taken into custody Friday.
You say the cops are lying so what is your version and where specifically were you?
Cops were crawling through his window, in Texas stand your ground includes firing on people outside your home. The person in the window and his buddies outside waiting to do the same. The Cops failed to identify themselves, they are at fault not the homeowner.
on that I differ with you...they are totally different cases and also totally different states with their own laws, Texas with a liberal Stand your Ground law...And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
On top of this, someone KNOCKING ON YOUR Door, is NOT IN ANY WAY the same thing as BREAKING THROUGH your window....
there is no good reason for anyone to NOT reasonably think the people breaking through their window, at 5:30am, are anything other than burglars or robbers and or murderers......unless the police identified themselves clearly before he began shooting...this man should not be charged in this case, in my humble opinion, from what little facts I do know on it.
UNLESS those people are screaming "police police police" as they do so. That changes things.
Although
Man Shoots At Intruders Turns Out It Was A No-knock Raid. Now He Faces The Death Penalty Page 6 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
is also true to, because the key is a jury . They are the ones you must convince that you had a reasonable fear. But that was my point, you have to PROVE you had a reasonable fear, which means you have to PROVE you didn't think it was the cops. Retired is WRONG, the state doesn't have to prove they were identifying themselves. Now, most of the time they WILL do so , just to go ahead and hammer that last nail in place, but they don't have to.
If they don't prove the police announced and the defense just remains silent on the matter any reasonable jury is going to assume that they announced. Wouldn't you? That's why self defense is an affirmative defense, you have to PROVE self defense, which in this case means proving you didn't know you were shooting at police.
And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?Cops were crawling through his window, in Texas stand your ground includes firing on people outside your home. The person in the window and his buddies outside waiting to do the same. The Cops failed to identify themselves, they are at fault not the homeowner.
If you are shooting at suspected home invaders climbing in your window, that makes the others outside "guilty" by association.
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
Stand your ground does not require any such thing. All he has to prove is that he feared for his and his families life as unknown men broke into his house, meaning the cops now have to prove THEY identified themselves in a manner he would have known who they were.And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?If you are shooting at suspected home invaders climbing in your window, that makes the others outside "guilty" by association.
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I wasn't there but apparently you were. Fill us in on some details. On the first page I posted:So SWAT is so efficient they can't even make it to somebody's window at 5:30 in the morning without them getting a drop on them.
If the guy said that he shot people outside the window, the cops just twisted his language. He probably said yea, the guy was a little bit outside the window (climbing in), and the cops twist that to make it sound like he was shooting them on the street.
"According to the arrest affidavit, Guy admitted to police he shot at “a number of persons” outside of residence before being taken into custody Friday.
You say the cops are lying so what is your version and where specifically were you?
Cops were crawling through his window, in Texas stand your ground includes firing on people outside your home. The person in the window and his buddies outside waiting to do the same. The Cops failed to identify themselves, they are at fault not the homeowner.
Yes in stand your ground states it doesn't matter where the person is. What matters is that the person with the gun feels threatened. That's it.
If the police didn't identify themselves then according to the law, that homeowner has the right to shoot them. Which he did.
What did those cops expect? They went through a window at 5:30 in morning. If you wake someone by climbing through their window at 5:30 in the morning, you better expect to be shot at. Especially in Texas.
This no knock policy is stupid. It's getting people killed needlessly.
Plus why didn't those cops do some investigation? They seem to have taken the lazy route and just went by the word of an informant. If they had done some investigation they would have found that there wasn't any drugs or drug dealing going on at that house.
A police was needlessly killed and others needlessly injured.
And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?If you are shooting at suspected home invaders climbing in your window, that makes the others outside "guilty" by association.
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
Because there is no reason to be that afraid of someone who is staying outside and only banging and only an unarmed young girl. However, why wouldn't you be afraid for your life when an unknown intruder is breaking in your window at 5:30AM?
on that I differ with you...they are totally different cases and also totally different states with their own laws, Texas with a liberal Stand your Ground law...And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
On top of this, someone KNOCKING ON YOUR Door, is NOT IN ANY WAY the same thing as BREAKING THROUGH your window....
there is no good reason for anyone to NOT reasonably think the people breaking through their window, at 5:30am, are anything other than burglars or robbers and or murderers......unless the police identified themselves clearly before he began shooting...this man should not be charged in this case, in my humble opinion, from what little facts I do know on it.
UNLESS those people are screaming "police police police" as they do so. That changes things.
Although
Man Shoots At Intruders Turns Out It Was A No-knock Raid. Now He Faces The Death Penalty Page 6 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
is also true to, because the key is a jury . They are the ones you must convince that you had a reasonable fear. But that was my point, you have to PROVE you had a reasonable fear, which means you have to PROVE you didn't think it was the cops. Retired is WRONG, the state doesn't have to prove they were identifying themselves. Now, most of the time they WILL do so , just to go ahead and hammer that last nail in place, but they don't have to.
If they don't prove the police announced and the defense just remains silent on the matter any reasonable jury is going to assume that they announced. Wouldn't you? That's why self defense is an affirmative defense, you have to PROVE self defense, which in this case means proving you didn't know you were shooting at police.
It would be reasonable to assume, and I assume that now that they did not identify themselves and would not have until they had ability to move inside the house, because that is what it appears to me is meant by "no knock" raid. If they shout "police" before they enter, what is the point of there being a knock or not a knock and saying it was a "no knock" raid?
And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
Because there is no reason to be that afraid of someone who is staying outside and only banging and only an unarmed young girl. However, why wouldn't you be afraid for your life when an unknown intruder is breaking in your window at 5:30AM?
Not to argue with the verdict passed, but how would the guy have known she was unarmed?
Stand your ground does not require any such thing. All he has to prove is that he feared for his and his families life as unknown men broke into his house, meaning the cops now have to prove THEY identified themselves in a manner he would have known who they were.And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
It seems to me if the person knew they were the police they wouldn't have shot at them. As the report says, the house was searched. No drugs were found and no evidence of any drug dealing was found.
So that person didn't have any reason to fear the police and shoot them.
on that I differ with you...they are totally different cases and also totally different states with their own laws, Texas with a liberal Stand your Ground law...And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
On top of this, someone KNOCKING ON YOUR Door, is NOT IN ANY WAY the same thing as BREAKING THROUGH your window....
there is no good reason for anyone to NOT reasonably think the people breaking through their window, at 5:30am, are anything other than burglars or robbers and or murderers......unless the police identified themselves clearly before he began shooting...this man should not be charged in this case, in my humble opinion, from what little facts I do know on it.
UNLESS those people are screaming "police police police" as they do so. That changes things.
Although
Man Shoots At Intruders Turns Out It Was A No-knock Raid. Now He Faces The Death Penalty Page 6 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
is also true to, because the key is a jury . They are the ones you must convince that you had a reasonable fear. But that was my point, you have to PROVE you had a reasonable fear, which means you have to PROVE you didn't think it was the cops. Retired is WRONG, the state doesn't have to prove they were identifying themselves. Now, most of the time they WILL do so , just to go ahead and hammer that last nail in place, but they don't have to.
If they don't prove the police announced and the defense just remains silent on the matter any reasonable jury is going to assume that they announced. Wouldn't you? That's why self defense is an affirmative defense, you have to PROVE self defense, which in this case means proving you didn't know you were shooting at police.
It would be reasonable to assume, and I assume that now that they did not identify themselves and would not have until they had ability to move inside the house, because that is what it appears to me is meant by "no knock" raid. If they shout "police" before they enter, what is the point of there being a knock or not a knock and saying it was a "no knock" raid?
Even in a no knock, the police MUST identify themselves AS they make entry. That literally means as they are kicking the door down.
on that I differ with you...they are totally different cases and also totally different states with their own laws, Texas with a liberal Stand your Ground law...And if not recorded what is the chance the cops would admit they did not identify themselves?Yup if a group of people are outside your window while one is attempting to climb in they are all criminals unless they identified themselves. Further why didn't the dumb ass cops go through the door?
I'm sure that someone had the door covered
You're making too much of this.
IF the police identified themselves as per procedure, this guy is fucked.
IF they did not follow procedure and didn't identify themselves then he's in the clear.
Tough shit for him. Self defensive is an AFFIRMATIVE defense, meaning he would have to PROVE that the police did not identify themselves, not the other way around.
I'll go further, let's compare this to the situation where that retard shot the black girl who was banging on his door. He was rightfully convicted, the jury denied his claims of self defense, but he couldn't prove that he feared for his safety. Simply saying " I was skurred I was gonna die" isn't enough, self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you have to PROVE you were scared for your life.
On top of this, someone KNOCKING ON YOUR Door, is NOT IN ANY WAY the same thing as BREAKING THROUGH your window....
there is no good reason for anyone to NOT reasonably think the people breaking through their window, at 5:30am, are anything other than burglars or robbers and or murderers......unless the police identified themselves clearly before he began shooting...this man should not be charged in this case, in my humble opinion, from what little facts I do know on it.
UNLESS those people are screaming "police police police" as they do so. That changes things.
Although
Man Shoots At Intruders Turns Out It Was A No-knock Raid. Now He Faces The Death Penalty Page 6 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
is also true to, because the key is a jury . They are the ones you must convince that you had a reasonable fear. But that was my point, you have to PROVE you had a reasonable fear, which means you have to PROVE you didn't think it was the cops. Retired is WRONG, the state doesn't have to prove they were identifying themselves. Now, most of the time they WILL do so , just to go ahead and hammer that last nail in place, but they don't have to.
If they don't prove the police announced and the defense just remains silent on the matter any reasonable jury is going to assume that they announced. Wouldn't you? That's why self defense is an affirmative defense, you have to PROVE self defense, which in this case means proving you didn't know you were shooting at police.
