Why would you "go in that direction"? Just because the man is no longer physically on top of the girl does not mean one can assume the threat is stopped.knotquiteawake wrote:I think its possible he will get charged if the following is true:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/he-got- ... -to-death/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;If he pulled the man off his daughter then at that point the assault has been stopped. To then beat the man in the head to death looks more like vengeful homicide. Once the crime is no longer in progress I think he would not be covered by the law anymore. If he pulled the man off his daughter how then is deadly force necessary? The crime has been stopped.After pulling the attacker off of her, the father repeatedly struck the man in the head.
What do you guys think? If I were the prosecutor that is the direction I would go with it.
Search found 2 matches
Return to “TX Dad defends daughter (4)”
- Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:19 pm
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: TX Dad defends daughter (4)
- Replies: 76
- Views: 10624
Re: TX Dad defends daughter (4)
- Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:35 pm
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: TX Dad defends daughter (4)
- Replies: 76
- Views: 10624
Re: TX Dad defends daughter (4)
Seeing as sexual assault is specifically listed as one of the crimes where deadly force is presumed justified, it would be hard to see this getting charged.mamabearCali wrote:I hope he is not prosecuted.
PC §9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A
person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.