What you think, the fat ass and his deputy wife will be charged? Or get away with murder? Yeah I know the guy pissed in public, drunk, allegedly started the fight, blah blah blah... but death sentence?
Part of me wants to say they probably didn't mean to kill anyone, the victim threw the first punch. So it was self defense at first. But the other part of me, that I know for certain, is the sheriff's deputy and her husband, and frankly their daughter if you've seen the video clip, are morally reprehensible and I think something like involuntarily manslaughter wouldn't be out of the question. It's not ok to kill someone, especially since it appears the husband forcibly strangled, for a long time, while plenty of others are saying stop, stop, and its clear the victim is incapacitated or no longer a threat. The daughter actively tried to block bystander video recording, and even threw out crap "it's against the law to record" blanket statements... which all had a very "I know this is wrong, don't record it" feel to it. A witness I heard said the husband was on top of him for 10-15 minutes in this stranglehold, choke-hold. Also, not to use the husband's knowledge of the police against him, but his wife, a sheriff's deputy, showed up and didn't do anything like say stop, don't hold him that way, etc. It all has a very racist, angry, redneck white guy feel to it... which obviously is not a legal judgement, just an opinion. And finally, we still need a bit more info. Absolutely its not ok to pee outside. And while it's not illegal to yell at someone for peeing outside, it wouldn't be absurd to conclude the victim was defending himself first, even though he threw the first punch. Cause it doesn't seem like this police officer husband was coming at it all like: "hey, you can't pee outside, that's illegal, I'm calling the cops" approach, but rather much more aggressively. At the end of the day, its absolutely ridiculous someone died for this, and there certainly seems like there should be punishment then. I'm not proud but neither ashamed to admit I've peed outside in a "public" area before, when drunk. It happens.
There was no reason for this guy to escalate things. Sure, I don't want a dude pissing in front of my kids, but I'm not going to put him in a choke hold because of it. This is a negligent homicide at the very least.
Well first of all, it's not "murder" at absolute most it's a case of manslaughter and honestly I think they'd have an uphill battle to even get those charges to stick due to a very good case that it was self defense. He can argue that the guy was drunk and acting irrationally peeing in public and then attacking him for saying something about it. He can also argue that he didn't intend on using deadly force and that he was only trying to restrain him. Even if there's a trial, I highly doubt it goes anywhere but maybe you have one anyway just to make the public happy.
Also, this isn't me condoning his actions, I'm just saying what is likely based on the law and what happened.
Why not just pee in the denny's where he was eating? I have a phobia for public restrooms and I decided a long time ago that if I really needed to go, I'd rather pee in my pants like fergie and have people laugh than have a cop ticket me. Don't you get classified as a sex offender for that? They should give the deputy's husband a manslaughter charge. He kept punching the guy once he was down. I'm no matlock but they could have a case. Poor guy was just celebrating a chivas victory. How often do the chivas win? 4pts, 2 spots behind 1st place.
That's the weird thing, the guy walked past a restroom to go outside to pee in public in full view of everyone. He would have almost certainly been given an indecent exposure charge on top of the public urination charge and had to register as a sex offender if he had lived. Of course that doesn't justify what happened to him, just pointing out that fact. On a different point, I wonder if we'll find out the fat guy laying on top of him played more of a factor in the guy dying than the headlock. That could factor in to a decision not to bring charges if that is the case.
This is just out of curiosity. If guys are in a verbal altercation, and one guy seems to be very aggressive and coming at the second guy, and the second guy swings first... how do you determine who is acting in self defense, who isn't, and whether it matters? I have no clue what happened here. But it seems like they got into a fight that both parties escalated. One would assume that the first interaction here between the two was instigated by the sheriff's deputy.
Well "acting aggressive" isn't a justification for assault in most cases so it would be a difficult self defense case to make.....also being piss drunk and committing a sex crime (I know, it's a lame one, but that's what the law in Texas states) takes away from any self defense argument the guy might have. As such, the person who has a punch thrown at him by the drunk guy who was confronted for committing a sex crime would have the self defense case most likely. The real question is if his actions were reckless and that he should have reasonably suspected that his actions would lead to the drunk guy's death. That'll be the basis for any charge.
This is a tough one. My guess is the Grand Jury does indict him and it goes to trial. From there who knows.
Lighter skin tone and connection to Police . . . .equals they will get off I'm sure a GO FUND ME is at the read . . . Rocket River
Or....you could see that a valid legal defense will equal that they'll get off, but I suppose it's more fun to only see skin color.
So he was upset that someone was peeing in front of his kid, therefore he murdered the guy in front of everyone's kids. Meanwhile, the media will make this a battle of how to label the murder. We all know it should be 7-10 years at least. Trump will say something purely driven by the accent and appearance of the assailant. Right will defend it with a distance. Left will attack the right, totally forgetting someone was murdered. The guy will get 2-3 years. No one will remember this in a month.
LOL several things. 1. There is no case that this was murder. None. Even calling this a murder destroys your credibility and suggests you didn't read to find out what actually happened. 2. You seem to be more worried about the color of their skin than what actually happened and that's weird. 3. I doubt Trump will say anything at all about this instance because it's unlikely to be a national story. 4. The guy is unlikely to serve any time based on the laws on the books and the circumstances surrounding the case. There might be a trial however.
1) It is murder, whether the laws over there say so or not. Is it ok for me to have this opinion or is that not allowed? 2) I don't care. Seems like it's just you and Trump. 3) We'll see. 4) Sure. I guess the laws are dumber than I thought then.
1) You are allowed to have any opinion you wish to have, but if that opinion is ridiculous it is likely to be ridiculed. Just so we're clear here, you calling this murder is you saying that the fat guy intended to kill the drunk pisser when he restrained him. If that's what you truly believe....okay I guess I just want to ensure we're on the same page about exactly what you are saying here. 2) You say that but I'm not the one that cares about the color of their skin, in fact, I haven't even mentioned it because to me it's an irrelevant factor.
I didn't see the entire video but it's sad how things among two human beings can escalate to the point that someone has to die over public urination.
I think the person that will be punished the most is the man's wife. She's a trained LEO and did nothing to prevent the victim from being killed. It's like a firefighter handing a can of hair spray to a man trying to put out a fire. It's gross negligence that led to manslaughter. I agree it is not murder but if the wife knew her husband was killing the man how is that not a crime?
