TexasCHLforum.com

RottenApple wrote:That's the real question. Did he or didn't he. He said, "ok" to the dispatcher, and he says he headed back to the vehicle. To my knowledge, there's been no physical evidence released so far to prove he did or didn't.

There is no evidence to contradict his statement that he was attacked while heading back to his vehicle. Without evidence to contradict, his story has to stand. At absolute minimum, his uncontradicted account constitutes reasonable doubt.

RottenApple wrote: What I'm curious about though, is if he didn't break off, does that justify T's attack on Z? I don't think so, but IANAL.

No, I can legally walk any public place I choose and follow anyone in public that I choose to follow. That is never justification for the other party to commit aggravated assault (sidewalk against the head = deadly weapon).

One part of this (although I am by no means excusing prosecutorial misconduct) that needs to be understood if many of these issues that have been ruled inadmissible are consistent with precedent.

Basically, if it is a fact about TM that GZ could not possibly have known at the moment in time that GZ decided to pull the trigger, then it shouldn't be admissible. The fact had no bearing on GZ's thought process when he decided to use deadly force.

For example, if you feel threatened by someone and shoot them, the fact that he had 8 prior felony robbery convictions was unknown to you at the time of his shooting.

Now, GZ can testify to what he actually saw, observed, and how he reached a conclusion regarding TM. If the prosecution tries to counter with testimony that TM was an alter-boy model child, then GZ can drag all the thug/guns/drugs testimony into the case to impeach the alter-boy testimony.

jmra wrote:

Beiruty wrote:This is where CHL for 18-20 yrs old (active armed forces) is problematic under federal law. They let fight for your country but can't buy a small pistol.

Yes. They can't purchase one but they can possess one under 21.

Clarification: an 18-20 year old can purchase a handgun in a private transaction (subject to state law), they just cannot purchase from an FFL under federal law.

77346 wrote:huge difference between the color and b/w versions of that photo

CNN is also running the story:



Unmarked hands:

Oldgringo wrote:The Feds have taken an interest in it. They'll sort the wheat from the chaff for sure.

Yeah, or under Holder's version of civil rights under the "Justice" Department, they walk in with the railroad line already laid out . . .