Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Stand Your Ground ... Again
rueh
Member (Idle past 3661 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


Message 38 of 46 (665676)
06-15-2012 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Jon
06-15-2012 10:12 AM


Jon writes:
Did he do something wrong?
After watching the video and reviewing the texas castle doctrine there are a few things that I would consider that he did wrong.
1. He was not in his "habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment". He was in the middle of the street. Which does not qualify as any of these areas.
2. A case could be made that he provoked the person against whom the force was used. By initiating the confrontation with his neighbors and then returning to the street inorder to continue the confrontation.
3. The victims were not involved in aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
I believe that these three qualifiers for the use of deadly force taken in conjunction with each other, would mean that Mr. Rodriquez was in the wrong and did in fact commit manslaughter.
Edited by rueh, : No reason given.
Edited by rueh, : No reason given.

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX
It takes all kinds to make a mess- Benjamin Hoff

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Jon, posted 06-15-2012 10:12 AM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Jon, posted 06-15-2012 3:55 PM rueh has replied

  
rueh
Member (Idle past 3661 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


Message 46 of 46 (665708)
06-15-2012 11:40 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Jon
06-15-2012 3:55 PM


According to the bill, there are other 'qualifiers' for the use of deadly force. It doesn't appear as though one must actually be in one's "habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment":
Whoops missed that part. legal jargon is certanly not a strong point for myself.
I cannot find where it is in the video that Rodriguez provokes the party goers. He was in the street. They drove to where he was. They got out of the vehicle. They began to harass him
From the video, yes it does appear that way. My only guess is that the jury was presented additional evidence from testimony that may have painted a different picture about the initial encounter with the party goers that was not on Rodriquez's tape. It may be that he had came over to the house and his actions provoked their response and by being in the street he was continuing that provacation. I know, it's speculative and I don't have anything to justify the statement. I am just trying to offer an example that may have influenced the jurors decision.

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX
It takes all kinds to make a mess- Benjamin Hoff

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Jon, posted 06-15-2012 3:55 PM Jon has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024