TexasCHLforum.com

WildBill wrote:I really can't tell what is going on either.
Obviously, the police found something that didn't add up.

puma guy wrote:

WildBill wrote:I really can't tell what is going on either.
Obviously, the police found something that didn't add up.

Hard to say from the details reported or lack thereof, but I agree something doesn't add up.

WildBill wrote:

puma guy wrote:

WildBill wrote:I really can't tell what is going on either.
Obviously, the police found something that didn't add up.

Hard to say from the details reported or lack thereof, but I agree something doesn't add up.

We were out hunting and I looked behind us and saw my uncle following us and he had a gun.
We need Paul Harvey, for the rest of the story.

While Scott Davenport has been charged with murder, this case could be deemed as a case of self-defense. In another recent case of possible “self-defense,” District Attorney Donna Gordon Kaspar explained, “The issue in most self-defense cases is whether or not the deadly force used was in response to a danger that may cause immediate serious bodily injury or death. In other words, was deadly force used in response to deadly force? Under the law, an individual can not respond to non-deadly force with deadly force. Therefore, you can’t shoot someone who hit you with a fist and caused a black eye or some other non-life-threatening injury. Self-defense does not mean a murder was not committed but it may justify the murder and it will be up to a jury to determine if the defendant can prove she was defending herself and therefore, justified in committing this murder.”

WildBill wrote:This new article is very confusing, but alludes that there was some kind of confrontation or assauly prior to the shooting, but that it did not justify deadly force.

While Scott Davenport has been charged with murder, this case could be deemed as a case of self-defense. In another recent case of possible “self-defense,” District Attorney Donna Gordon Kaspar explained, “The issue in most self-defense cases is whether or not the deadly force used was in response to a danger that may cause immediate serious bodily injury or death. In other words, was deadly force used in response to deadly force? Under the law, an individual can not respond to non-deadly force with deadly force. Therefore, you can’t shoot someone who hit you with a fist and caused a black eye or some other non-life-threatening injury. Self-defense does not mean a murder was not committed but it may justify the murder and it will be up to a jury to determine if the defendant can prove she was defending herself and therefore, justified in committing this murder.”

It seems like this quote from the DA is about another case, but it is a very interesting quote.


http://houstoncountylife.com/2011/04/05 ... -man-dead/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

puma guy wrote:The comments attched in the link appear to be conflicting regarding any penchant for violence. Another site has a niece and close friend stating he is a violent person. Regardless of the outcome this has to be tearing a family to pieces. One can only pray for them.