Author Topic: Driver shoots Road Rager in Parking lot: A Case study in the justifiable use of Force  (Read 1089 times)

SC-Texas

  • houston
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
  • On Target +3/-0
Driver shoots Road Rager in Parking lot:  A Case study in the justifiable use of Force.

I first posted this on my TexasGunTrust.com page because I have had people asking me about the use of deadly force.

Watch the video of the assault with the bat or club.
Read the Texas statutes.  Was the use of deadly force justified?

1.  White car pulls into parking space
2.   Black sedan follows and blocks white car
3.  Black sedan driver exits and retrieves weapon from trunk.
4.  Black sedan driver approaches white sedan drivers side as driver of white sedan opens door but is trapped between club wielding Black sedan driver and drivers door.
5.  Driver if white sedan retreats back to drivers seat and attempts to close door.
6.   Black sedan driver Prevost door closure and starts swinging club hitting white sedan drivers door and windshield.
7.  Black sedan driver opens drivers door of white sedan to gain access to the driver
8.   3rd party intervenes
9.   Driver of white sedan begins shooting.  You can see effect and surprise on Black sedan drivers face as he has turned to face threat from 3rd party intervened.
10.   3rd party intervenor then pushes the driver of the white sedan back toward drivers door, pinning him as the driver appears to shoot Black sedan driver over the 3rd party intervenor shoulder.

A couple of observations:
1.  The 3rd party intervenor could easily have been mistaken for an attacker and shot by the driver of the white sedan.
2.  The 3rd party intervenor could easily have been shot accidently by closing on a guy shooting
3.  The 3rd party intervenor tried to take the driver of the white sedans gun away from him.   That would have lead to his receiving a round from many people reading this.   Would that have been justifiable use of deadly force?

On prevention.
1.  The driver of the white sedan may have lacked situational awareness.
2.  Why did he pull into a parking space that allowed the other driver to trap him.
3.   Why did he let himself get trapped by his drivers door?
4.   Why did the driver of the white sedan allow the 3rd party intervenor to trap him against his drivers license?
5.   Why did the driver of the white sedan allow the 3rd party intervenor to get close enough to wrestle for the gun?
6.   Should the driver of the white sedan have viewed the 3rd party intervenor as a threat?

Some interesting thoughts to Ponder.

Sec. 9.31.  SELF-DEFENSE.  (a)  Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force.  The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1)  knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:
(A)  unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;
(B)  unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or
(C)  was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;
(2)  did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and
(3)  was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.
(b)  The use of force against another is not justified:
(1)  in response to verbal provocation alone;

(4)  if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless:
(A)  the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter;  and
(B)  the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor;  or
(5)  if the actor sought an explanation from or discussion with the other person concerning the actor's differences with the other person while the actor was:
(A)  carrying a weapon in violation of Section 46.02;  or
(B)  possessing or transporting a weapon in violation of Section 46.05.

(d)  The use of deadly force is not justified under this subchapter except as provided in Sections 9.32, 9.33, and 9.34.
(e)  A person who has a right to be present at the location where the force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used is not required to retreat before using force as described by this section.
(f)  For purposes of Subsection (a), in determining whether an actor described by Subsection (e) reasonably believed that the use of force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor failed to retreat.

Texas Penal Code 9.32. Deadly Force in Defense of Person

(a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31;

and

(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force;

(b) The actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the deadly force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;
(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;  or
(C) was committing or attempting to commit an offense described by Subsection (a)(2)(B);
(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used;  and
(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.
(c) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this section.
(d) For purposes of Subsection (a)(2), in determining whether an actor described by Subsection (c) reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor failed to retreat.

https://youtu.be/DqeWNclrO0E

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

TexasRedneck

  • New Braunfels
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3549
  • On Target +52/-1
  • Spam Hunter Extraordinaire
In a nutshell....the driver of the black car was justifiably shot by the driver of the white car.  The driver of the white car, not knowing the intent, motivation or means of the intervening person could have legally utilized deadly force against him, as well.

Did he trap himself?  To a large intent, yes.  Did that abridge his legal right for self-defense?  Absolutely not.

Just my thoughts.  We ALL have to realize it's a LOT easier to "quarterback" stuff like this when you're watching the video.
South Central Regional Director
Texas State Rifle Association

SC-Texas

  • houston
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
  • On Target +3/-0
That is the truth

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk


LJH

  • Austin Tx
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1248
  • On Target +18/-1
    • Infosmash
I am just a little late on this, but I think driver of white sedan knew he would be on camera, hence his choice in parking spots.  Also the way he and Mr 3rd person interacted it appeared as they were familiar with each other.
The GP is wicked strong

Wolfwood

  • N.B. TX
  • Rather Clever
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1085
  • On Target +9/-2
I hadn't noticed that lj, good catch

LJH

  • Austin Tx
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1248
  • On Target +18/-1
    • Infosmash
The GP is wicked strong

TexasRedneck

  • New Braunfels
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3549
  • On Target +52/-1
  • Spam Hunter Extraordinaire
Interesting find - thanks for sharing it!
South Central Regional Director
Texas State Rifle Association