TexasCHLforum.com

Tex1961 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 14, 2022 6:14 pm

philip964 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 14, 2022 6:03 pm

Ruark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 14, 2022 4:59 pm

Now climate-change extremists have started slashing tires of SUVs (like that's going to make any difference). They slash the tires, or deflate them and jam something into the valve, then of course stick a nasty note under the windshield wiper.

They've hit New York and San Francisco so far, but I read one article where they declared that this movement is preparing to "explode all over the world" in the near future.

https://tatumreport.com/group-of-climat ... the-world/

https://www.foxbusiness.com/energy/envi ... lthy-areas

Generally speaking, you can't legally use deadly force to protect property, but at the rate this tire-slashing and city-burning is going, that might need to change soon. This is getting out of control.

Not even at night in Texas?

Yes, you can use deadly force at night to protect property.

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41 ;  and

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robber A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;:

Here's TPC 9.42:

Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or;

((Subsection (b) goes on to describe the justification for using deadly force to recover property immediately (ie, without delay) after it was taken. Since it doesn't apply to this thread (unless the environmental terro-activist was stealing your tires...), I didn't copy/paste it here)).

Since TPC 9.42 requires you to already have been justified in using force under TPC 9.41, here's what that says:

Sec. 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY.
(a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.

((I omitted Subsection (b) of TPC 9.41 for the same reason as above )).

Here's how Criminal Mischief is defined in the Texas Penal Code:

Sec. 28.03. CRIMINAL MISCHIEF
(a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner:

(1) he intentionally or knowingly damages or destroys the tangible property of the owner;

(2) he intentionally or knowingly tampers with the tangible property of the owner and causes pecuniary loss or substantial inconvenience to the owner or a third person; or

(3) he intentionally or knowingly makes markings, including inscriptions, slogans, drawings, or paintings, on the tangible property of the owner.

"Pecuniary loss" means the property owner is out money because of the offender tampering with the owner's property.

So, in my layman's understanding, you would have 'legal justification' in Texas to use force to stop that type of criminal activism (ie, someone slashing your tires or damaging the valve stem) regardless of if it was daytime or night time, 24-hrs a day. You can only use the amount of force that is reasonable to stop them, & only while it is still immediately necessary. But NOT deadly force under TPC 9.41.

If, however, it is during the night, under TPC 9.42 you may be legally justified to use either force, OR deadly force, to prevent or stop the criminal activist from slashing your tires/tampering with your valve stems (ie, criminal activist commiting criminal mischief). Again, you must reasonably believe that whatever level of force you used was immediately necessary to prevent/stop it.

Also note that the definition of "justification" in TPC 9.02 is:

Sec. 9.02. JUSTIFICATION AS A DEFENSE. It is a defense to prosecution that the conduct in question is justified under this chapter.

So, understand that a defense to prosecution means:

Sec. 2.03. DEFENSE. (a) A defense to prosecution for an offense in this code is so labeled by the phrase: "It is a defense to prosecution . . . ."

(b) The prosecuting attorney is not required to negate the existence of a defense in the accusation charging commission of the offense.

(c) The issue of the existence of a defense is not submitted to the jury unless evidence is admitted supporting the defense.

(d) If the issue of the existence of a defense is submitted to the jury, the court shall charge that a reasonable doubt on the issue requires that the defendant be acquitted.

So, my layman's understanding is that
(1) the prosecutor doesn't have to 'disprove' that your justification/defense doesn't apply when they charge you (ie, it is different when the law has an "exception", or says "this section doesn't apply if..."; In those instances the prosecutor must first establish that the 'exception' doesn't apply to your case before he can charge you. With a "defense to prosecution", the prosecutor doesn't have to negate that a defense exists), and;

(2) the jury doesn't get to hear that a defense is available, UNLESS you submit evidence that supports the defense.

BUT, if you submit evidence that supports the defense, the jury must be instructed to acquit you even if they have reasonable doubt regarding the justification (the defendant gets the benefit of the doubt).

So, even if a criminal activist is committing this at night, you could potentially still be charged by an activist prosecutor. It would be up to you (or better left to you lawyer) to provide evidence that supports your reasonable belief that criminal mischief was occuring at night.

References:
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs ... /PE.28.htm

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.2.htm


((And yes, I believe I just coined the term "criminal activist" & "activist prosecutor". Feel free to use it as often as possible to describe the sluggards who have lessened inhibitions of enforcing compliance with their ideologies))