TexasCHLforum.com

Mike S wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 2:42 pm

jordanmills wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 12:35 pm

fickman wrote: ↑Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:47 am This is a mess. I am extremely unsympathetic to the shooters even if there is an avenue by which a shrewd attorney may cobble together an effective defense. Their temperaments subvert everything we are trying to accomplish on this forum.

BEGIN WILD SPECULATION BASED ONLY ON CURRENTLY AVAILABLE PUBLIC INFORMATION

Were I a juror, I would find them guilty of murder.

I feel strongly that they were not standing their legal ground, but rather that they entered the alley to be the armed enforcers of the neighborhood dumpster rules. They go into the alley with the intent to enforce their side of the dumpster dispute, they refuse to deescalate / walk away / defer to governing authorities, and throughout the video - they make it apparent that they want the fight and are looking for an excuse to make good on their threats. I'd go so far as to say they went into the conflict thinking they could bait him into crossing their line in the sand. These two wanted to shoot somebody and (again - my own speculation) probably thought they'd gotten their legal defense airtight by trying to use all of the self-defense magic words. I wouldn't be surprised if they both have years of posts on AR15.com about how tough they are.

I hope they get the longest sentence possible; if nothing else than for the message it will send to other mouth-breathers who think their gun elevates them to a new power strata. I'll be disappointed if they get away with lower charges.

Failure to retreat can't be considered, by law. I'd go so far as to say that they were familiar with Howard's history of violence which would make it dangerous to even turn their backs on him. Also, that would be a good reason why the elder Miller would be inclined to come out with a handgun in the first place (assuming he doesn't habitually carry outside his home, as I and many other people do), and why the younger would go inside to get the shotgun.

That said, I'm not convinced they weren't out to shoot someone, regardless of actual justification, and I have a hard time finding sympathy for anyone involved in the mess.

Actually, the No Duty to Retreat clause found in TPC 0.31 & 9.32 only applies if you:
1. Had a right to be present;
2. Did not provoke the person; and
3. Were not engaged in criminal activity.

From the little snippet of video I've seen, I have no idea if either Miller would have forefeited the protection of No Duty to Retreat. My understanding was that the dumpster was in a common area, so they likely had a right to be present. If the judge deems the Millers provoked it (especially given any history between the actors), then it might be introduced at trial.