TexasCHLforum.com

srothstein wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 6:32 pm
I wonder what will be said by the full panel when they rehear the appeal.

The full court upheld the panel 7-4. The link I provided was to the three-judge panel opinion because that’s the only official document I could find, But the original story is about the forecourt upholding the panel.

I have no problems with the invader being shot, and I don’t See any moral reason he should’ve been prosecuted in the first place, accident or not. But the homeowner made a lot of trouble for himself By talking when he shouldn’t have.

philip964 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:09 pm https://www.cbs19news.com/content/news/ ... 02561.html

Judge erred by not telling jury about self defense as attorney asked.

The rest of the US is not like Texas.

So you have a DA, a judge, 4 appeal court members and a jury not doing the right thing.

Story says he broke through the dead bolted door after being told he was not welcome in the house.

Well.

The defendant told the police at least twice that he did not intend to shoot the intruder, that he pointed the rifle at the intruder's legs because he only wanted to scare him, and that he was shaking badly when the rifle discharged.

So basically he told the cops it was not self-defense, it was an accident. He did not testify at his trial.


Also of interest: The rifle he used was his 12th birthday present (he was 53 at time of incident). He kept the rifle unloaded with only two rounds rubber-banded to it. He loaded only one round before confronting the intruder coming down stairs. The bullet he fired went through the intruder's left calf, through his right thigh, and lodged in a stair tread. The intruder died from these wounds.

https://law.justia.com/cases/virginia/c ... 7-4-0.html

The link goes to the decision of the three judge panel that reversed the conviction. It contains a summary of the facts at trial.