TexasCHLforum.com

Interesting case to read/study as related to a killing, claims of self defense, proximity of firearms and other weapons.

http://m.statesman.com/statesman/pm_230 ... d=CzCWMC8d" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The two men got into a confrontation outside a home in East Austin that resulted in Valenzuela stabbing Sedqy-Abdalla three times, but Sedqy-Abdalla might have been trying to get at a shotgun in the trunk of his car, attorneys and law enforcement officials said

Your link isn't working for me (perhaps because it's a mobile address). Here's a good link to the story: http://www.statesman.com/news/local/no- ... tArticle=y

And here's a link I found to the original story: http://www.myfoxaustin.com/dpp/top_stor ... z1n9REI2C1

It looks like all the details from the original are in the no-bill story, but the original is written in such a way that the accused is pretty much convicted there on the screen. At first, I wondered how the original would have been written if the details about the shotgun in the trunk had been known, but then I realized that they had to have been known and already in the police report from the scene. Otherwise, one would think that such evidence would probably not be admissable in court. (As always, IANAL.)

Did the journalist genuinely not know about the shotgun in the trunk, or was it left out for some reason to make the story more sensational? "Man charged with murder" sounds a lot better in the media world than "Man successfully defends himself".

...only those genuinely concerned with finding the truth are interested in all the facts...those with a predisposition towards their own agenda seem to discard facts like a beagle diggin' under a fence throws dirt!!!

nice digging savage and thanks for correcting the link (I forget that my iPhone sometimes defaults to mobile story links)

Just as the "journalist" showed an inclination to "convict" the man in question, so I will "convict" the media. They (the vast majority of them, anyway) are ideologically predisposed to do things like that article. They have a monolithic viewpoint and very little of the "journalistic integrity" that they like to boast of having. Mark Twain was right (to paraphrase him) in saying that not reading the news makes you uninformed and reading the news makes you ill-informed.

Interesting case. No one retreated. Man who came out did not take woman back inside, but instead made the knife known. Man who died was not at his home, but at the others. Male defending female against another male. Man ran away after stabbing the other. Seems the man being threatened by the other with the knife should have just left. But was he prevented from getting in his car by the man with the knife. He was stabbed because he went for his gun. But the knife had already escalated the conflict. Did not say there was any physical contact before the stabbing. Hmm.

If it was a CHL instead of a shotgun in the trunk. Would the CHL have been no billed if he shot the man who arrived with a knife out and ready to use.

I've always heard about a legal term called "precedent". That is, the legal system looking at what has gone before, if I understand it correctly. And it seems that a LOT of precedent has been set in this state, through several cases over the last some-odd years...IANAL so I don't know how many cases of a type set precedent, though or if there is a "magic number". Self-defense does seem to have gained some real solidity here in this state. Not a license to go do whatever mind you, but if they in AUSTIN didn't think there was enough to even bring a trial on THIS one, then a law-abiding citizen involved in a shooting against a (likely) armed, prior-criminal-record assailant would hopefully have a good chance of being no-billed, as well.