Pray for their repentance.
Chad Reed shooting in Texas
- Thread starter get2choppaaa
- Start date
Pray for their repentance.
To sum up the article the Lubbock DA recused himself on November 10, so it went to the state.
To claim self-defense is a unique legal action. Normally, the state has the burden of proof in a criminal case and the defense need not prove anything. But to claim self-defense the defense has the burden of proof. The instructions to the jury will then be, if they find the claim to self-defense to probably be true, then they must acquit. In a prior post it was mentioned what the various requirements are to claim self defense. There are several requirements that must be met, one of them is that a reasonable and prudent person in that situation would beleive they were in immediate grave danger when they used deadly force.
The point the prosecutor will hammer on is that when the shots were fired the shooter was a good distance from the victim and the victim was not advancing. When the shots were fired the shooter was not endangered by the victim. Yes, the victim had demonstrated that he was angry and more powerful (yet had injured only the pride of the shooter), but at that moment and at that distance he could not do grave harm, or any harm. The big had tried to disarm the shooter? After the shooter had fired a shot towards him (the warning shot) to disarm him could be claimed as self defense by the victim. Otherwise, so what? Did the big have have arms twenty feet long to disarm him and use the gun against him at that distance.
As well, it could be argued that the shooter provoked the victim, and thus loses the claim for "stand your ground" and therefore had a duty to retreat. He did not retreat when he could clearly do so safely, and thus another requirement for legal self defense is not met.
Small guy gets pushed around, go gets a gun, then shoots the other guy out of anger after being pushed around again. That is called Murder in the Second Degree. Up to 20 years in the state penitentiary if convicted. Capital murder if any of it was planned.
I'm just getting in the loop on this story but it does seem to be like the shooter broke rule #1 of self-defense w/ a firearm which is you don't draw your weapon until you're ready to kill someone - meaning your life is in imminent danger. Voluntary manslaughter seems like a stretch in this instance. I think the guy was just trigger happy and let his emotions get the best of him from someone barking up a storm on his front porch.
Now if he'd herded his family inside the house and Read had kicked the door in - perhaps would be justified. Or certainly if Read had presented deadly weapon prior to him toting out the rifle, etc.
I think this event like many others serves as a reminder that you need to keep your head screwed on straight even in times of high stress (Read & Carruth both).
Now if he'd herded his family inside the house and Read had kicked the door in - perhaps would be justified. Or certainly if Read had presented deadly weapon prior to him toting out the rifle, etc.
I think this event like many others serves as a reminder that you need to keep your head screwed on straight even in times of high stress (Read & Carruth both).
Last edited:
Except your problem here is that in Lubbock and in Texas period.... Property is something you can shoot someone for and people really don't get too worked up over it.
Texas has the most liberal use of force views in regard to life and property. (in the positive sense)
After thorough reflection and more that has come to light... The little guy was justified under the law.
And they're right for it so props to Texas. Castle doctrine (using 'home' not property) vs TX style stand your ground.
If I tell someone to get off my property and they don't at least make an attempt to do so, never mind increase their aggression, it should be justified to use deadly force at some point.
However, do I want to kill someone over being a hot head on my porch? Absolutely not unless I felt myself or my family was in imminent danger.
Like I said I'm just catching up on this and it'll be interesting how it shakes out.
In general thats correct. The narrative that the guy was hot about not getting to see his kid is pretty much irrelevant considering that you cant come on someone's property, get in their face and try and take their gun after saying they better use it because youre going to kill them with it.
As I have experienced growing up in rural East Texas, and I can attest the same is true in West Texas (Lubbock) and North Texas (Wichita Falls) and all other areas of Texas that are rural... people WILL get a gun and tell you to get off their property. When you don't the WILL shoot you.
Everyone knows this which is part of the excitement of pasture parties, and the danger of getting shot at for trespassing on people's land. Let alone poaching on hunting grounds or coming up and getting into a domestic altercation. People get shot A LOT over that.
Even if it was pre-meditatied that they would provoke the guy to getting into a fight... you cant do that crap and not expect to get shot.
So unless something comes out that completely changes the known facts at this time... I say its a clean shoot and my position has clarified due to the reality of bad acting on the ground with Chad Read and the hot head mentality.
You just cant do that crap.
No charges for Kyle Carruth for shooting Chad Read
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/gray/GB74TFPPKFDTXBKC75IJP5JJBU.jpg)
www.kcbd.com
I guess it’s not a shock given that it took place in Texas.
Homicide of Chad Read goes before grand jury, no charges will be filed against Carruth
Sources tell KCBD no charges will be filed against Kyle Carruth after the Attorney General’s Office convened a grand jury in the death of Chad Read.
I guess it’s not a shock given that it took place in Texas.
No charges for Kyle Carruth for shooting Chad Read
Homicide of Chad Read goes before grand jury, no charges will be filed against Carruth
Sources tell KCBD no charges will be filed against Kyle Carruth after the Attorney General’s Office convened a grand jury in the death of Chad Read.
I guess it’s not a shock given that it took place in Texas.
Legal outcome aside, it's hard not to feel really bad for Read's children. Not only will they grow up knowing that their mom's bf killed their father and got off legally, they'll also have to deal with the fact that their mother instigated the situation in the first place by not honoring the custody agreement. I'm sure a lot of non-custodial parents get jerked around like Read did, only in this case it had a much more tragic and violent ending.