Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevy Baby
In reading the story, I see this (emphasis mine):
This is difference for me (assuming it is true - that will be for the jury to decide). If he had shot the robbers just to stop the robbery (of someone else's property), then I would have no sympathy for him. If he was truly defending himself, then he was justified in defending himself.
But I am with GD: he show a very clear intent to kill. First Degree Murder IMO.
|
As I understand it, they came into his yard until after he went outside. Had he done what the 911 dispatcher told him to do, his life never would have been in danger in the first place. Couple that with his intent to kill and it seems clear this guy wanted to be vigilante.
Also, unless I'm mistaken, the jury already found him not guilty. Big surprise in Texas.