TexasCHLforum.com

Perhaps many of those not having a CHL could also use some instruction on the use of deadly force:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 21788.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reverting back to a thread in "Never Again," what might well have been the result here if one or more of the alleged assailants had been armed, CHL or not? Or is that two questions?

Elmo

Mob mentality.

Does not look too good for the guys going off this limited information.

He was breaking into their personal property at night. Aren't they justified to use deadly force?

It says that two of them were pinning him to the ground when police arrived. It doesn't say they were still beating the unconscious man.

How is this different from shooting him until he stops?

I seriously doubt that I would shoot a guy breaking into my car. If I caught him and he attacked me, different story.

Hoi Polloi wrote:He was breaking into their personal property at night. Aren't they justified to use deadly force?

It says that two of them were pinning him to the ground when police arrived. It doesn't say they were still beating the unconscious man.

How is this different from shooting him until he stops?

The difference is the disparity of force between 4 able bodied people and one apparently unarmed thief and the level of threat he could have presented to them.

It's pretty likely that the suspect ceased resistance let alone posing a deadly threat or even the possibility he might escape with difficult to recover property well before he died. When those things stopped, so did the justification for use of force beyond simple restraint if a citizens' arrest was being made.

It would take an imaginative attorney to argue the reasonableness of beating a man to death under the reported circumstances if the information in the article is essentially correct and there isn't a whole lot more to it.

Someone privately pointed out that it happened at 2 PM. I don't know why I thought it was night.

The article jumps from guy breaking into the car to the police arriving to find two men holding him (not hitting him) and him being unconscious. While they very well might have used excessive force well past the time any threat he posed passed, I don't recall reading any proof of that in the article.

Four men fatally beat a man they caught trying to break into a truck on Thursday could face murder charges, police said.

Police said the four men are construction workers who apparently had spotted a man breaking into one of their pickups.

"They proceeded to beat, kick and punch the suspect and pull him away from the vehicle," Senties said. "They were still here when the officers arrived."

Detectives will be checking security cameras in the shopping center.

An autopsy for the dead man has been ordered.

The article says pretty clearly that they "beat and kicked" the alleged robber. The autopsy will provide more information along with any footage from security cameras.

Hoi Polloi wrote:Someone privately pointed out that it happened at 2 PM. I don't know why I thought it was night.

The article jumps from guy breaking into the car to the police arriving to find two men holding him (not hitting him) and him being unconscious. While they very well might have used excessive force well past the time any threat he posed passed, I don't recall reading any proof of that in the article.

There is a possibility that intentional strikes may not have caused the death.

After the men punched and kicked the suspect, they may have held him down in a manner that they failed to realize kept his chest compressed and thus unable to breathe (e.g., by sitting or kneeling on his chest or back). This can produce a condition known as "compression asphyxia," where pressure on the chest keeps it from expanding and allowing the lungs to fill with air. It could be an element in a negligent homicide instead of a murder.

I would have linked to some technical literature on this, but many of the articles contain graphic photos of the incident scenes and the bodies and body parts at autopsy.

Those interested in the details can Google "compression asphyxia" for excellent info on this phenomenon. These technical articles are very informative, but not recommended for the squeamish.

An autopsy for the dead man has been ordered.

Wouldn't bother me if they ordered autopsies for any thieving criminals caught live as well.

The latest news story indicates that investigators are now leaning toward the unintended compressional asphyxia theory I suggested earlier. No charges have been filed so far after initial statements and a security camera video were reviewed. Details here.

Excaliber wrote:The latest news story indicates that investigators are now leaning toward the unintended compressional asphyxia theory I suggested earlier. No charges have been filed so far after initial statements and a security camera video were reviewed. Details here.

Interesting development, Excaliber. Reinforces waiting a bit before making snap judgments, I reckon.

I was intrigued by the LEO's statement in the Chronicle article you sent us:

"It doesn't appear to be a case of murder," Oxspring said Friday. "We're looking at the degree of force used and whether it was appropriate..."

"In the process of being detained, it appears he may have been detained too hard," Oxspring said.

This appears to offer a chance for further speculation with respect to charges which could be brought.

Elmo

Thanks for posting the updates.

Quoting the article that Excaliber linked to:

His exact cause of death has not been officially determined since pathologists are still waiting for toxicology test results to see if he had any drugs or alcohol in his system, Oxspring said.

I came to this thread late, but even before reading all the way through it, I was prepared to say that there may well have been other medical issues in play here. If the thief was a drug user and heavy smoker, he might have suffocated more easily than a normally healthy male. There are all sorts of factors that can confuse even the knowledgeable as to whether or not this was excessive force.

Just my opinion, but my guess is that the 4 guys did not set out to kill him. They were, after all, detaining him, presumably for the police who had been called; but they did also engage in a bit of "get some," because it doesn't seem like 4 grown and healthy men would need to repeatedly kick and punch someone who was down, even if on some level he deserved it, if detaining him for the police was the stated goal.

I don't think this rises to the level of murder, but it certainly looks like a manslaughter charge is imminent. I think the outcome is going to depend on whether their "peers" in the jury sympathize more with the thief than with the the accused.... ....OJ Simpson, and all that....

The Annoyed Man wrote:Quoting the article that Excaliber linked to:

His exact cause of death has not been officially determined since pathologists are still waiting for toxicology test results to see if he had any drugs or alcohol in his system, Oxspring said.

I came to this thread late, but even before reading all the way through it, I was prepared to say that there may well have been other medical issues in play here. If the thief was a drug user and heavy smoker, he might have suffocated more easily than a normally healthy male. There are all sorts of factors that can confuse even the knowledgeable as to whether or not this was excessive force.

Just my opinion, but my guess is that the 4 guys did not set out to kill him. They were, after all, detaining him, presumably for the police who had been called; but they did also engage in a bit of "get some," because it doesn't seem like 4 grown and healthy men would need to repeatedly kick and punch someone who was down, even if on some level he deserved it, if detaining him for the police was the stated goal.

I don't think this rises to the level of murder, but it certainly looks like a manslaughter charge is imminent. I think the outcome is going to depend on whether their "peers" in the jury sympathize more with the thief than with the the accused.... ....OJ Simpson, and all that....

It may be that the actions of the citizens were incidental to the reason the suspect died, in which case neither murder nor any other form of homicide charge would be appropriate.

There's a possibility that excited delirium was involved as either a primary or contributing factor. If it were, that would explain a violent struggle and why even 4 men might have difficulty controlling a single individual without using a great deal of force.

Folks in this state fight ferociously - and then go into sudden irreversible systemic collapse and die despite suffering no significant injury. The person they've been fighting is almost invariably completely shocked when this happens.

Police are trained to look for the condition and treat it as a medical emergency. However, it would be a most unusual citizen who had even heard the term, let alone be able to recognize it during the course of physical conflict. It's far less well known than even compressional asphyxia, which isn't on the top of the list of causes of death most folks could readily recognize either.

Here's a bit more technical information for those who are curious about the science.

There is no black and white test for this condition at autopsy. The pathologist has to draw a conclusion from the pattern of facts before him, and it's as easy to be wrong as it is to be right. A high level of a stimulant drug in the dead man's system would be one of the initial markers that might move the investigation in this direction.