TexasCHLforum.com

jmra

RoyGBiv wrote:
Charles L. Cotton wrote:Thanks, I was talking about "Bad bad Leroy Brown" but typing McDermott.

Chas.
As long as you're not hearing voices, it's all good.

And thanks for the legal lesson(s)... I really do need to take your class next time you're near DFW.

I also would like to attend your class if you do one near DFW.

jmra

texanjoker wrote:
jmra wrote:
texanjoker wrote:
RX8er wrote:
texanjoker wrote:
baldeagle wrote:
texanjoker wrote:Had you used deadly force it would have been ugly and could have cost you your freedom. Sure they "may" have been gang members but is fighting a deadly force issue when your buddy is running his mouth off escalating the situation? I am glad you didn't have to find out. Depending on the grand jury it could be cleared or you could have been charged. He owes you a good bottle or dinner. Be thankful it ended the way it did.
Yes, fighting is a deadly force situation. Google one punch kill. The law allows you to present your weapon whenever force is justified and threaten deadly force if the attackers escalate. That's exactly what he did. And it worked.

If you don't think that fighting is a deadly force situation, you need to do some reading. As I said, google one punch kill.
Sorry but I have to disagree.
Not to be confrontational but is this from a LEO or lawyer standpoint? I have read about several and they were no bill and no arrest.

So, if I had a guy punch me in the face, out of the blue, and I pulled my firearm and he continued to come after me, you would arrest me?
No worries. LEO point of view, which is going to be different as I said in my original post. Just wanted to share a different point of view as the point of this thread should be to think what one would do. This wasn't just a person being punched out of the blue. They had an altercation in the bar, went out side and his intoxicated buddy was also being verbal so it wasn't one sided. Sure there can be some no billed, ect but that is probably after going to jail, paying bond, paying legal fees, ect.

re a different post. For me colors meant possible gang involvement, but then a lot wear colors in certain hoods and are not part of any gang. Just wearing the local color.
My understanding from the OP was the friend only smarted off in the bar, was too scared to say anything once they left the bar. I think we all can safely assume that the other guys were intent on inflicting physical damage.
So, once they retreated from the bar and were attempting to leave wouldn't the following apply?
(4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless:
(A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and
(B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor

I believe, based on the OPs account, that both A and B apply. If so, the original altercation doesn't prohibit the OP from defending himself.

You are missing a sentence in his original post:
We get to my car and I open it and he opens his door but he starts letting his ego get involved and smart talks back at the 4 men as they approached.
In my experience of responding to lots of bar fights and bar stabbings, very rarely is it one side. It usually escalates just like this incident did and once you collect all the evidence and witness statements this is how it began. I also wonder if the OP had any alcohol in his system. I mentioned that earlier as well as you can have a beer and be sober and serve as the DD. However it could be a negative factor if you use deadly force.

This was a good thread to get people to think. Everybody will make their own decision.

I saw that earlier but then later (IIRC) he qualifies that his friend only engaged the others verbally in the bar. Said he was too scared to say anything as they were leaving.
I'm sure as an officer you would view this as an inconsistency in the story which in an investigation would bring the account of what happened into question.
No offense intended toward the OP.

jmra

texanjoker wrote:
RX8er wrote:
texanjoker wrote:
baldeagle wrote:
texanjoker wrote:Had you used deadly force it would have been ugly and could have cost you your freedom. Sure they "may" have been gang members but is fighting a deadly force issue when your buddy is running his mouth off escalating the situation? I am glad you didn't have to find out. Depending on the grand jury it could be cleared or you could have been charged. He owes you a good bottle or dinner. Be thankful it ended the way it did.
Yes, fighting is a deadly force situation. Google one punch kill. The law allows you to present your weapon whenever force is justified and threaten deadly force if the attackers escalate. That's exactly what he did. And it worked.

If you don't think that fighting is a deadly force situation, you need to do some reading. As I said, google one punch kill.
Sorry but I have to disagree.
Not to be confrontational but is this from a LEO or lawyer standpoint? I have read about several and they were no bill and no arrest.

So, if I had a guy punch me in the face, out of the blue, and I pulled my firearm and he continued to come after me, you would arrest me?
No worries. LEO point of view, which is going to be different as I said in my original post. Just wanted to share a different point of view as the point of this thread should be to think what one would do. This wasn't just a person being punched out of the blue. They had an altercation in the bar, went out side and his intoxicated buddy was also being verbal so it wasn't one sided. Sure there can be some no billed, ect but that is probably after going to jail, paying bond, paying legal fees, ect.

re a different post. For me colors meant possible gang involvement, but then a lot wear colors in certain hoods and are not part of any gang. Just wearing the local color.

My understanding from the OP was the friend only smarted off in the bar, was too scared to say anything once they left the bar. I think we all can safely assume that the other guys were intent on inflicting physical damage.
So, once they retreated from the bar and were attempting to leave wouldn't the following apply?
(4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless:
(A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and
(B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor

I believe, based on the OPs account, that both A and B apply. If so, the original altercation doesn't prohibit the OP from defending himself.

jmra

Wodathunkit wrote:find a real friend.

Fixed for you.

jmra

texanjoker wrote:Look at a different perspective. You are out with your friend who is drinking. How much did you have to drink? One can drink a couple of beers and still be sober and drive. There is a incident in the bar so you decide to leave - very smart. They follow you to the parking lot and as you stated your friend "starts letting his ego get involved and smart talks back at the 4 men as they approached." That is now a two sided incident that is escalating and will result in a typical bar fight. The key word is "fight." Is that a deadly force situation? He isn't saying he is going to kill you and he is not displaying any weapons. You didn't mention anybody else being armed other then you, and you were the one displaying your gun and getting ready to fire a round per your post. You are very lucky those other guys didn't call 911 wanting to make a report. Had you used deadly force it would have been ugly and could have cost you your freedom. Sure they "may" have been gang members but is fighting a deadly force issue when your buddy is running his mouth off escalating the situation? I am glad you didn't have to find out. Depending on the grand jury it could be cleared or you could have been charged. He owes you a good bottle or dinner. Be thankful it ended the way it did.

I'm not ever looking for a fight and I avoid situations that lead to one. However, as shown by the recent death of the soccer referee who was punched by a 17 yr old and died, one punch can be deadly. If someone approaches me intent on doing harm, they will be asked to stop. If they do not, I will draw and ask them again to stop. If they do not, I will defend myself by whatever means necessary.
The problem I see here which I believe you are alluding to is an altercation prior to the gun being drawn. However the OP and his friend were actually retreating when confronted. It would be messy but you do what you have to do.

jmra

Things that don't go over well with juries (more than likely composed mostly of women over 40):
"The defendant shot and killed a man after the defendant and his friend argued with the deceased over a $5 bill in a topless bar."
This may be the only thing the jury actually "hears" the whole trial. Not a position I would ever allow myself to be placed in for any "friend".

jmra

Bgriff1974 wrote:Ha. Yes I agree completely.. I never go to those type of places but my friend was all out of sorts and that's what he wanted to do so I went. First time in like 15 years and definitely the last.. lol

With those kind of friends you sure don't need any enemies.
Interested in what the police had to say.

TexasCHLforum.com

Search found 7 matches

Re: Wrong place at wrong time

Re: Wrong place at wrong time

Re: Wrong place at wrong time

Re: Wrong place at wrong time

Re: Wrong place at wrong time

Re: Wrong place at wrong time

Re: Wrong place at wrong time