TexasCHLforum.com

Katygunnut wrote:The story says that "Police are seeking a Houston man accused of shooting a man he believed to be a peeping Tom at an apartment complex."

How do police know what the shooter believed unless they talked to him after the shooting? If they did talk to him, then why is still at large and not in custody? I think we are missing some info here.

If you read the story they have the man, David Thompson, in custody. The story stated that, before the shooting, Thomspon talked to another man and told him about the suspected "peeping. The other man is the one who reported him to the police. The alleged "peeper" Darrell Williams who was shot in the head, is not expected to live.

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?secti ... id=7980103" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Keith B wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:I thought that was only if you pour salt in the hole made by the burnt stick.

Salt would aggravate the wound, so guess that would make it aggravating a-salt.

You guys are really on a roll.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Keith B wrote:

mjoplin wrote:Disturbing story from Houston:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 46019.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If the story is accurate, then sounds like there was no self defense involved. Sounds more like an execution and the guy should be tried for murder if this is the whole story.

So, can you poke 'em in the eye with a burnt stick?

Are you suggesting "an eye for an eye"?

Keith B wrote:

WildBill wrote:Out of curiosity, what is the official name for the crime of "peeping".

Basically it is an invasion of privacy and carries a disorderly conduct charge. TPC 42.01(11) covers it

Thanks Keith!

Out of curiosity, what is the official name for the crime of "peeping".