Ooops.

http://www.chron.com/default/article/Ho ... 630968.php

Jurors Wednesday evening ruled Raul Rodriguez is guilty in the shooting death of Kelly Danaher at a 2010 party in northeast Harris County.

The jury deliberated about five hours in state District Judge David Mendoza's court. They will return Thursday to consider his punishment.

Jurors decided that Rodriguez provoked Danaher and others BY GOING TO THEIR PARTY TO DEMAND THEY QUIET DOWN just after midnight on May 2, 2010. Defense lawyers said Rodriguez should have been found not guilty of murder because it was self-defense.

Xela

Yep, yet another case where someone goes onto someone else's ground. Oops.

ErikO wrote:Yep, yet another case where someone goes onto someone else's ground. Oops.

The FAIL pained me when Rodriguez says while on the phone "I'm standing my ground here"...(GROAN!)...

IN FRONT OF THEIR DRIVEWAY!!!

Nope, guess that don't work that way.



Xela

Thanks, Xela.

Unfortunately, as usual, the press is utterly useless in its reporting.

I'd be really really interested to get a transcript of how the prosecution argued their case, because what I'm seeing here is a case where SYG was invoked but the jury decided (correctly, it seems) that SYG was not a valid defense.

lemur wrote:Thanks, Xela.

Unfortunately, as usual, the press is utterly useless in its reporting.

I'd be really really interested to get a transcript of how the prosecution argued their case, because what I'm seeing here is a case where SYG was invoked but the jury decided (correctly, it seems) that SYG was not a valid defense.

It would be interesting to see those. It seems from the video tape that Rodriguez brandished the weapon and himself escalated the confrontation. I would imagine that the defense did not have that great a case to argue. The man may have known the buzz words, but I think he did not understand the purpose of the law.

I can see going to your neighbors and asking them to turn down the music. I have done that. If they don't respond, then you call the police. That is the way things are handled in a civil society. Castle Doctrine and SYG laws are supposed to be protections for people who have little recourse but to use deadly force. Situations like this and the one with Joe Horn, also in Texas; display how the laws can be abused by people who want to lash out.

I have heard many a time, "Never do with a firearm what you would not do without one". That seems to be good idea that needs to be drilled into people's heads. It seems in this case and the Horn case, that armed people wanted to impose what they thought was "right" onto others, then use self defense as an excuse for violence.

Caliman, I agree with everything you wrote. A small note here:

Caliman73 wrote: I can see going to your neighbors and asking them to turn down the music. I have done that. If they don't respond, then you call the police.

The guy called the police but it looks like they did nothing.

lemur wrote:Thanks, Xela.

Unfortunately, as usual, the press is utterly useless in its reporting.

I'd be really really interested to get a transcript of how the prosecution argued their case, because what I'm seeing here is a case where SYG was invoked but the jury decided (correctly, it seems) that SYG was not a valid defense.

If quoted accurately, this is a simple and apparently powerful argument:

"Raul Rodriguez is a neighborhood bully who had a CHL, an arsenal of weapons and a knowledge of the law," said prosecutor Donna Logan. "He felt he had the ultimate control, the control to decide who lives and who dies."

She told jurors that "self-defense was never meant to protect the one who started the fight."

Saw the article a few days ago, the jury made the right decision. Rodriguez's video sunk his defense.
http://gma.yahoo.com/texas-man-found-gu ... ories.html

I don't think being a Pussy is a justifiable reason for shooting someone dead. Southern SYG is pretty stupid.

Sentenced to 40 years in prison.

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas ... 666967.php

The jury made the right decision. In Texas the SYG law was meant to amend the standard self-defense provision of our Penal Code. Originally a citizen was supposed to flee if he could before resorting to deadly force to defend himself. The SYG law amended that to say a citizen does not have to flee the scene, but can use deadly force if he feels threaten. I have no serious problem with the way our law is written now, however, I don't think the states that passed SYG laws ever intended those laws to be used as an excuse to commit murder or "administer justice" by private citizens. I applaud the jury for seeing that.

Here's a 1909 Savage ad with the stand-your-ground phrase.

Pull a gun or look like a tenderfoot.