Quanell X humiliated, marginalized by large crowd in Pasadena

If only the opinion of the author mattered one bit. It turns out all that matters is how a judge interprets the law as written. When a facial reading of the law says you can defend the property of a third person, there is no reason to think it doesn't apply to a neighbor.

 

That seems to be the most difficult thing to do in this case in my opinion. I am not saying he was wrong and I am not saying he was right. Neighbor can be a very broad term.

 

Generally if one is involved in a drug ring, they are making enough cash to not have to resort to stealing televisions from homes. I would be surprised if they were actually part of any drug ring, and not just petty criminals.

 

You the intent of the legislature doesn't matter to the judge?? Particularly after the guy who authored the bill went public and said, "this was not what we intended to protect"???

 

Irresponsible use of "facts", TJ. I hoped for better from you.

BOTH WERE SHOT IN THE BACK!!

http://www.click2houston.com/news/14802500/detail.html

HOUSTON -- An autopsy showed two burglary suspects were shot in the back allegedly by a Pasadena neighbor who witnessed their crime, KPRC Local 2 reported Friday.

 

Yeah, no way he could have waited for the police to show up. They never show up....OR THEY WERE ALREADY ON THE SCENE AND WITNESSED THE SHOOTING!

I'll agree with Quannel on this point...why are we just now finding out that a Pasadena police officer witnessed the whole thing????

Self defense, my ass. He assumed the risk of this whole deal by walking out on to his yard with a shotgun after he was urged by authorities not to.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5362232.html

Pasadena police say Horn shot 2 men in the back
Both men were hit by shotgun blasts after entering Joe Horn's front yard


By CINDY HORSWELL and ROBERT STANTON
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle


Pasadena protests collide The two burglary suspects killed by Pasadena homeowner Joe Horn were shot in the back after they ventured into his front yard, police disclosed Friday.

In another twist, investigators revealed that a plainclothes Pasadena detective witnessed the Nov. 14 shootings after he pulled up in an unmarked car seconds before Horn fired three shots from his 12-gauge shotgun.

The men, who had just burglarized Horn's neighbor's house, faced him from seven to 10 feet away when they ignored his order to "not move"or they would be dead, police said.

The controversial shootings have outraged minority activists but also brought an outpouring of support for Horn.

"We now have a summary documenting what we think happened," said Capt. A.H. "Bud" Corbett. "We will turn it over to the district attorney in a couple of weeks after we do an extensive review for quality control."

The district attorney will then present the case to a grand jury to determine if any charges should be filed against Horn, 61, a computer consultant, who has claimed self-defense.

The two men — Diego Ortiz, 30, and Hernando Riascos Torres, 48 — collapsed and died not far from Horn's home on Timberline in a Pasadena neighborhood.

Both were illegal immigrants from Colombia, authorities said. Torres had been deported to Colombia in 1999 after serving time for possession with intent to distribute cocaine. Both were also using fake identification cards and aliases, and their backgrounds are now being scrutinized by federal authorities to determine if they were part of a Colombian fake ID and burglary ring, authorities said.

On Friday, Corbett described the shooting scenario that had been pieced together so far.

According to a transcript of Horn's 911 call, at 2 p.m., he became concerned that his next- door neighbor's home was being burglarized after hearing some glass break.

The dispatcher repeatedly urges Horn to stay in his house but Horn states that he doesn't feel it's right to let the burglars get away.

"Well, here it goes, buddy," Horn tells the dispatcher. "You hear the shotgun clicking and I'm going."

The dispatcher replies: "Don't go outside."

Then the tape records Horn warning someone: "Move and you're dead!" Two quick shots can be heard, followed by a pause and then a third shot.

Corbett said the plainclothes detective, whose name has not been released, had parked in front of Horn's house in response to the 911 call. He saw the men between Horn's house and his neighbor's before they crossed into Horn's front yard.

Corbett believes neither Horn nor the men knew a police officer was present.

"It was over within seconds. The detective never had time to say anything before the shots were fired," Corbett said. "At first, the officer was assessing the situation. Then he was worried Horn might mistake him for the 'wheel man' (get-away driver). He ducked at one point."

When Horn confronted the suspects in his yard, he raised his shotgun to his shoulder, Corbett said. However the men ignored his order to freeze.

Corbett said one man ran toward Horn, but had angled away from him toward the street when he was shot in the back just before reaching the curb.

"The detective confirmed that this suspect was actually closer to Horn after he initiated his run than at the time when first confronted," said Corbett. "Horn said he felt in jeopardy."


Autopsy report
The wounded man crossed the street, collapsed and died, authorities said. At the same time, the other man had turned and ran away from Horn.
Horn swung his shotgun around after shooting the first man and fired at the second one after he entered the neighbor's yard, investigators said.

He was hit in the back but continued running until collapsing a few hundred yards down the street, Corbett said.

According to a final ruling, Ortiz died of shotgun wounds to his neck and torso, said Ellie Wallace, an investigator at the Harris County Medical Examiner's Office.

The report said that Torres died of shotgun wounds to his torso and upper left extremity.

Wallace could not confirm whether the men were shot in the back, saying the autopsy report only indicated they were shot in the torso.

Neither suspect was armed, but one had a "center punch," a 6-inch pointed metal tool, in his pocket that might be used as a weapon, authorities said.

Also, they were carrying a sack filled with more than $2,000 in cash and assorted jewelry believed taken in the burglary, police said.


Self-defense claim
Investigators believe a third person may have driven the men from Houston to the Pasadena neighborhood. Police could find no vehicle belonging to the pair parked in the area.
On the 911 tape, Horn mentioned a new state law that allows residents to protect their own home from intruders.

"This case is a little different," Corbett said. "We'll have to let the grand jury sort this one out."

Horn's attorney, Charles T. Lambright, said his client fired in self-defense because he feared for his life.

"One of them (suspects) moved and Joe thought he was coming towards him," Lambright said. "They were in such close proximity (to Horn) that they could be on top of him in half a second."

The fact that a police officer witnessed the shooting but did not arrest Horn is further evidence that he acted in self-defense, he said.

"You've got a trained police officer sitting there watching this, and he doesn't arrest Horn," Lambright said. "If the (plainclothes) officer thought it was not a righteous shooting, maybe the Pasadena Police Department would have arrested Mr. Horn for murder."

Civil rights activist Quanell X said he would step up the call for a murder indictment against Horn, and questioned whether the Pasadena police should investigate the case.

Quanell X said the shooting should be handled instead by the Texas Rangers and the FBI.

"I don't trust the Pasadena Police Department," he said. "Why are they just now releasing the fact that an undercover officer witnessed the whole thing? This case stinks."

 

wonder if the police officer was eating popcorn in his car enjoying live vigilantism?

 

Let's look at this story's version of the facts:

1) Two burglars finish robbing a house
2) At least one of them runs at Mr. Horn
3) At least one of them is IN Mr. Horn's yard
4) At least one of them ignores Mr. Horn's order to freeze
5) An officer on the scene took it all in and did not determine that Mr. Horn was at fault.
6) Wallace could not confirm whether they were shot in the back

Seriously Max, what planet are you living on if you think that this isn't a VERY threatening situation for Mr. Horn? Any fool could recognize this is self defense in its truest form.



CASE CLOSED

 

He told them to stop and they did not. I don't think robbing someone deserves death, but I mean they could have just stopped if those robbers actually cared about their life.

 

He engaged the situation...a situation that was inherently dangerous...despite being told not to. You can't go out with a shotgun telling everyone who will listen how you're gonna kill someone, and then argue it was self-defense after you shoot them.

CASE TO GRAND JURY!!!

 

I would say it largely depends on the judge, and public statements by the author are definitely not binding. If they were, that would give an inordinate amount of power to a single legislator, who could put something very vague in a bill and once it became law come out and say it meant whatever he wanted it to, conveniently bypassing the whole process of voting on the bill and getting executive approval.

 

its also interesting that the police officer says he was careful because he didn't want Horn to turn the gun on him.

 

so you're just going to totally ignore the post that confirms they were shot in the back. an autopsy has proved this, there is no further debate. I also find it interesting that you doubt a police officer's account when you feel the need yet you're the guy who always preaches about how we should trust them.


NO CRED

 

I'm re-quoting this for the sake of pgabs, who misread it. The autopsy did not say that he was shot in the back.

 

[rquoter]
Horn's attorney, Charles T. Lambright, said his client fired in self-defense because he feared for his life.

[/rquoter]
I think I've read or heard the lawyer mention that Horn 'feared for his life' several times now. I may be reading this wrong but would this be a tacit acknowledgement that immunity under the 'castle doctrine' law may not apply, and the attorney is trying to set up a second legal justification for the shooting to not be murder?

BTW, again I'm not a lawyer but reading the Texas Penal Code, it is not tresspassing for someone to be on your property unless it is posted beforehand, or unless you've told them to leave, given them a chance to leave, and they've refused. I have a difficult time understanding how these men being on Mr. Horn's lawn affects anything by itself. I don't believe the lawn is part of the 'castle'.

Maybe you misread it. He simply says that he can not confirm that they were shot it the back. He never says that he can confirm that they weren't shot in the back. It appears that the autopsy report is silent on this issue or that he is not willing to discuss with the press what the autopsy report says on the issue.

 

Would you say that the police have some obligation to disclose facts to the media at some point? From my perspective it seems perfectly reasonable that they might save the details for the information they passed to the DA. I would personally not be in favor of the investigation throwing salacious details of the story to the wolves of public demagoguery.

 

Someone help me here. . . .but . . . A Shotgun . . it only holds 2 shots?
Did this b*stard Reload?

After two shots with a Shotgun . . .He still feeling threatened?

Rocket RIver

 

well it is about perspective
Keeping Details out of the public eye . . . can be seen as something to have for the trial
or
a way to cover up something.

As the police always tell the public
IF YOU DON'T HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE . . . . . THEN YOU SHOULD BE OK WITH FULL DISCLOSURE

amazing how they get all quiet when their stupid argument is turned on them

Rocket River

 

If he had a pump, he'd have more than 2, RR. What a b*stard. I hope he ends up charged with something, even if he won't get what he deserves.



Trim Bush.

 

So the two points which the burglar-supporters are leaning on are the following:

1) They were allegedly shot in the back (unconfirmed by the autopsy, however)
2) Mr Horn announced his intentions to shoot the burglars before doing so, therefore it can't be self defense.

Obviously, #1 is unconfirmed. Regardless of it being true, it in no way lessens the threat to Mr. Horn simply because their backs might have been turned. I guarantee you they turned to run when Horn lifted his gun. Horn likely didn't have time to discontinue his actions, particularly given their close proximity. Second, how does he know they aren't running to the car to get themselves a gun?
With regard to #2, this is totally debunked by the fact that anyone in that positioned would be threatened, and in need of self defense, if they are aware of two burglars in the immediate vicinity and on the loose. I guarantee you Mr. Horn was feeling threatened at that time. If he wasn't, then why go out there with a gun? Ouch.

The Quanell X / pro-burglar team really has no argument here. The law is against them. The facts are against them. Public sentiment is against them. They are merely arguing for the sake of arguing. They have no case.