Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'In the News' started by GlockGary, Jul 13, 2016.
Wow...reported in the HuffPo? Hell just might be freezing over...
Wow. The article is about as even-handed a description as I can conceive of from THP. Has anyone checked the temp in Hell as GM404 suggested?
He has now been identified.
AND This article adds some details. The robbery was complete, and the customer followed the robber out to the parking lot, where he shot him.
Oye...did I mention something about PERCEPTION in another thread? I am happy the perp is off the street, but perhaps a PHONE CALL to his wife would have been more appropriate (assuming he COULD call her). This only fuels the fire of the anti's.
EDIT: Well, if the good guy's story adds up, then I would change my assumption of a bad shot. This would be legal (although not too smart IMHO).
It's still a legal shoot.
Why would it be illegal?
A citizen can arrest a fleeing armed robber. If the robber resists with an AK47, then he has what is coming to him, and the law is on the citizen's side. I assume Texas law is not so different from Georgia in this respect.
"Police said the customer was not arrested."
My wife is notorious for not answering her cell phone...... Second guessing a shoot that the police/prosecutor aren't calling bad makes no sense to me.
I edited my post (probably while you were posting) and to be clear...it IS a good shoot IAW Texas Law.
I noticed that it said at the end of the article: "Police said the customer who shot the suspect was not arrested. The case will be submitted to a grand jury for review."
My question; With Georgia's "immunity clause" (I think that is what it is called), had this happened here and the police did not arrest, would this have never made it to the "grand jury for review"?
Ah, THP added the statement since earlier today. The Dallas News article referenced ends with the quote I put in earlier.
I had not noticed your quote, nor was I attempting to highlight it. I was however asking another question about Georgia Law that tends to go unanswered around here for some reason.
Do you have to know a secret handshake or have over a thousand posts around here to have Georgia gun law questions answered?
My IANAL understanding is that immunity is an affirmative defense you raise at a hearing in the beginning of the proceedings. It's not an automatic get out-of-charges card. Cops may or may not recommend charges. Prosecutor may or may not file charges. Judge may or may not grant immunity motion.
It might go to them for review, but any smart lawyer would have it thrown out immediately.
that sounds like the difference between a man that just has a gun, and one that knows how to use one coupled with the will to do so.
Appreciate the info.
In Georgia sometimes they give it to the grand jury for review just to have the grand jury return a no bill.
Look, we presented it to the grand jury, and they would not indict.