TexasCHLforum.com

I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice; but it seems to me that someone who shoots a person and then says it was unintentional is vulnerable to a slam-dunk manslaughter conviction.

A New York man demonstrated that point.

In 2006, a high-school student got involved in a cell-phone and internet feud with "classmates." (They didn't have this stuff when I was a kid.) The conflict deteriorated to the point where a group of drunk high-school students came to the home of the boy that they were feuding with. When the dust settled, the homeowner had fatally shot one assailant.

The homeowner claimed that the shooting was an accident.

He was found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to 2 to 4 years in prison. Last week he lost an appeal.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/nation ... id=1256399" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

New York has a pretty solid castle doctrine, but it seems not to extend 81 feet from the walls of the home. I wouldn't be confident that Texas castle doctrine does.

- Jim

White needs to sue the pants, etc. off of all those yankee honkys! This is the epitome of racial harassment in Noo Yawk - of all places.

I think I agree with this outcome. He should have stayed inside (with loaded shotgun) and called the police when he first knew they were headed his way.

Oldgringo wrote:White needs to sue the pants, etc. off of all those yankee honkys! This is the epitome of racial harassment in Noo Yawk - of all places.

The comments about him being a black man were unfortunate, but I don't think that made a difference.

C-dub wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:White needs to sue the pants, etc. off of all those yankee honkys! This is the epitome of racial harassment in Noo Yawk - of all places.

The comments about him being a black man were unfortunate, but I don't think that made a difference.

It would have made a great difference if that had happened in Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia or even Texas, etc.. You bet it would have made a big difference.

The NYT would have made a headline out of it and the POTUS would have his cretins all over it.

Um, it was big news in 2006 and it's big news now. A Google search for "John White manslaughter Garden City" turn up 4,430,000 hits.

BTW, speaking as a native of one, the northern big cities have a racist streak that goes clear to the bone. They just don't like to admit it.

As far as suing, I'm still not a lawyer; but my understanding is that being found guilty of a felony makes it rather difficult to file a lawsuit claiming that you were wronged. Besides, what are you going to get from a bunch of delinquent teenagers?

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:Um, it was big news in 2006 and it's big news now. A Google search for "John White manslaughter Garden City" turn up 4,430,000 hits.

BTW, speaking as a native of one, the northern big cities have a racist streak that goes clear to the bone. They just don't like to admit it.

As far as suing, I'm still not a lawyer; but my understanding is that being found guilty of a felony makes it rather difficult to file a lawsuit claiming that you were wronged. Besides, what are you going to get from a bunch of delinquent teenagers?

- Jim

Failed representation and racial bias leading to a mistrial kinda' jumps out at me. Can you say "O. J."?

Parents are responsible (should be) for their underage offspring's behavior; especially, if they're driving the family car or using other family stuff (cell phones) in their assault on this poor black family.

Get a rope! No, get several ropes!

Oldgringo wrote:Failed representation and racial bias leading to a mistrial kinda' jumps out at me.

If the facts that were reported are correct (always a stretch, but that's all we have to go on), the guy is guilty of manslaughter.

A mob of drunk teenagers yelling outside your house is alarming and a very real threat, but I don't know anywhere that shooting at them would be justified simply because of that.

If the homeowner had said that he feared for his life when the deceased reached into his waistband, he might be a free man today; but apparently he made that self-incriminating statement about the shooting being unintentional.

As for suing the parents of juvenile thugs, the law is unsettled about how much liability parents have for their children who are approaching age 18. On top of that, many families now have a net worth close enough to zero to make suing them futile.

- Jim

This whole thing, as it is told us, reeks. I strongly suspect the honky police told him to say that he was sorry. The black man was quoted and tried in the white press, etc. etc. The white (?) judge swept it away. A sophomore law student, pro bono, could have a field day with this case on appeal .

Had this happened, in reverse, in the south; well, you know how it would play in the yankee media.

BTW, IANAL but I can read.

I don't know if you're being sarcastic or what.

The guy talked himself into jail. He had failed to memorize

That man tried to kill me and I shot to stop him.

- Jim

I don't care what color everbody was. I find it disturbing that somebody is DEAD and the manslaughter conviction was ONLY 2-4 years! With time off for good behavior, overcrowding, budget short falls etc. He might be home in time for dinner. That was basicly a free pass.
The trouble today is "Guilty" is no big deal!
That's my $.02, OE

It's not just the prison time. Convicted felons are prohibited from so many rights and privileges, it's rare that they have any kind of future.

- Jim

I think that it is an unfortunate set of circumstances where a man feels compelled to set up a defensive-fire perimeter with open rules of engagement based on the report of a teenage son who is upset over internet arguments, all outside the defined area of operations.

Sitting in the house with weapons prepared, phone ready and defined rules of engagement seem more appropriate. I see no problem with the manslaughter sentence.

One shouldn't form an opinion on the correctness of the verdict in this or any other case based on media reports. To have an informed opinion, one should read the actual court reports. Has anyone done that?

duns wrote:One shouldn't form an opinion on the correctness of the verdict in this or any other case based on media reports. To have an informed opinion, one should read the actual court reports. Has anyone done that?

That holds true for each and every court case ever mentioned on this forum.

I prefer to base my opinions on unsubstantiated and rampant speculation, Thank You.