Quanell X humiliated, marginalized by large crowd in Pasadena

I think one of them was shot in back.

 

One was shot in the chest in the neighbor's yard. The other was shot in the back while he was trying to flee down the street.

 

HELL YEAH!! shooot all these piece of ***** that has NOTHING better to do but rob people and sit in jail for a short time and come back out with ANOTHER CHANCE TOOO!! until someone get kill by them one of these days .... and most of you guys defending these criminals now .... sure wait until it happens so someone you know...

if they dont want to get SHOT UP ... stop ROBBING and get a DAMN JOB! ... stop sittin around collect welfare and robbin others hard earn stuff. DAMN I'm pissed just watching this stuff ......

 

QUANELL X is the one MAKING THIS INTO A RACE ISSUE!

if is was a BLACK HOME OWNER that shot up 2 white guys do you think he would SHOW UP???

HELL YEAH!! defending the BLACK HOME OWNER!!! for sureeee


F HIM!!

 

pre-meditated and unjustifiable under castle doctrine

 

gotta disagree with you. they wrote it so that people would have legal justification to arm and defend themselves against criminals. he may be a cowboy, he may have a short fuse, he may even be joe "marshall dillon" horn... but he still has the right to used deadly force and so on and so forth...

and YES, request is verbal or written...

BUT BUT BUT!!! if some one REASONABLY BELIEVES that someone doesnt want something stolen. then you are empowered by the law to protect the 3rd parties property w/o a verbal or written request bc you have REASONABLY determined that is what they would have wanted.

here is the section that i am continually referring to that you refuse to recognize. its nice and vague just like i said...


from: http://www.self-defender.net/law3.htm

Reasonable Belief

"It is not necessary that there should be actual danger, as a person has the right to defend his life and person from apparent danger as fully and to the same extent as he would have were the danger real, as it reasonably appeared to him from his standpoint at the time."

"In fact, Sec 9.31(a) [of the Penal Code] expressly provides that a person is justified in using deadly force against another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary."


from: texas penal code

§ 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 he reasonably believes the force is
immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or
attempted use of unlawful force.





attorney: did you reasonably believe you were justified in using force?

horn: yes.

attorney: did you reasonably believe that your neighbor didnt want his porperty stolen?

horn: yes.

attorney: did you reasonably believe the stolen property couldnt be recovered?

horn: yes.

attorney: did you reasonably believe that there was no other way in preventing the escape of the burglars without the use of deadly force?

horn: yes

attorney: your witness...

 

So do you think the death penalty should be applied to burglary?

 

man I'm just tired of all these crimes going on in Houston .... I dont care what race you are .... if you get caught and go to jail FINE. if you get shot up at the moment. FINE.


you know how many familes gets rob by this scumbags and assaulted, rape or beat up in their own home and they get away, or get caught and go to jail and come back out.

yeaah some is just rob n go but imagine if your family was at home at some moment.

so F THEM

 

not covered under the castle doctrine but covered under the texas penal code.

i guess cnn didnt look into the fact that in texas you have the right to defend a neighbors property.

 

POINT is .... 2 less scumbag to worry about, if they didnt get caught .. they rob again .... if they get caught, oh what? go to jail for couple of months and come back out and ..


lets try again?? is like a cycle for them until innocent people get kill by it.

so F them

 

alright well send it to trial... see what a jury will do.

 

i though about that. what if these 2 guys were breaking into a home in an african american neighborhood. and the neighbor shot the 2 burglars... then what? probably wouldnt even be in the news.

 

ummm...no one is defending the criminals. no one is suggesting they shouldn't have been held accountable for burglary.

as a child i lived in a home that was broken into. they took all kinds of stuff. we had insurance. it was disturbing to be sure....but i'm not interested in killing the guys who did it. i've had items stolen from my car...and a car stolen. again...i don't want to kill them. i have insurance. taking a life is a lot less savory to me than losing some stuff that can be replaced.

 

Actually both my parents and my own homes have been robbed a few times, twice when I was there. In college I even punched someone breaking into my house.

 

Honestly, why this is such a big news story has nothing to do with the new law or race or anything like that. It has everything to do with the 911 tape. If we didn't have the tape, and didn't know the situation, my guess is that Horn's support would be even stronger. I know that if I didn't know his state of mind, I would have immediately assumed that he went out to stop them and felt threatened. (I think one of them did have a crowbar or something.) From hearing the 911 tape, I understand that he just went out "to kill him some criminals". But he wasn't protecting himself at all. He was taking justice into his hands.

 

honestly, i don't know how you can read that 911 transcript and still defend him. i don't get that at all.

 

People don't want their homes invaded, and for good reason. If he had let them go, they could be next.

 

this is gonna be the last post on this topic for me. my fingers are tired of typing and by eyes are strained from looking at the computer monitor...

in my opinion, joe horn is a good samaritan. many of you dont agree with this. i totally understand the other side of the coin. but i focus in on the fact that the 2 dead were burglars caught in the act. im no legal expert but in my opinion, the texas penal code covers horn.

3 ways to put him away...

1) premeditation: there is strong evidence from the tapes but any decent defense attorney can cast doubt. remeber that the burden of proof lies on the prosecution. all the defense has to do is hire 1 or 2 psychological experts and have horn testify that it wasnt what he had truly intended

2) he recklessly endangered a 3rd parties life: hes the only witness. no one else around. no one to endanger...

3) he had them subdues but killed them anyways (execution style): audio tapes dont seem to agree w/ this, hes the only witness, no forensic evidence yet. someone mentioned one shot in the chest (must have been facing towards horn) and the other shot in the back while fleeing (the texas penal code allows you to use deadly force on someone fleeing)...

yall have fun w/ this, im out.

 

I don't want my home invaded, either.


I still don't think what this guy did is ok.

 

I asked this question in the other thread and didn't get a response from anybody.

So, I'll ask again...here.

If you were the neighbor who almost got rob, would you prosecute Horn?