No news about Enrique Recio shooting in Avery Ranch (Austin: live in, military)

[ScoPro]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jaephart

This whole thing smells.

Well, everybody does have an opinion, don't they?

[mesmer]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

Yes, I am interested in seeing how the courts and a jury see this. I agree that there is much about the law that is "open to interpretation" and not clear in its wordings or meaning. That is usually left up to the juries to struggle to figure out.

In a similar recent case the jury found the shooter not guilty of shooting an escort who he claimed was stealing his $150 after refusing to have sex with him. He shot her outside of his condo on the way to her car as she was leaving and trying to get away from him. I would have never expected the jury to reach this verdict but they did. I still think they were wrong, it is so sad that Texas law leaves so much up to the interpretation of the jury to try and figure out what the law means. Which is also one of the reason I find this so interesting. If I ever need to use a weapon in self defense, I desire to understand when that is legal, or most importantly, when it is not.

https://www.city-data.com/forum/san-a...t-shooter.html

That is untrue. He shot at the car's tires while the woman and the driver were driving away, and the bullet ricocheted off the tire into the cabin of the car.

[atxcio]

So we find out his defensive strategy today:

He claims he thought Enrique's cell phone was a gun.
Defense: Shooter thought other man

Which is pretty much along the lines of what I expected; he would use the fear-for-safety/life threatened defense. So it will come down to whether the defense believes him, and I'm guessing he will have problems with previous statements and witness testimony conflicting with his story.

He's also accused of harassing potential witnesses in his neighborhood:
Yazdi trial evidence shows history of making threats

[CptnRn]

The final closing arguments have been made and the Jury has gone into deliberations on this trial. Deliberations continue in Avery Ranch murder trial | www.statesman.com

I was waiting to see if any other evidence of burglary or theft came out in the trial, but the only new things I learned from the trial was that Enrique Recio had a cell phone, which Yazdi is said to have believed was a gun. And that Recio had made several phone calls to his friend who was on his way to pick him up and a witness at the wreck site said Recio fled the scene after learning the witness had called 911. Which makes Recio's actions at the Yazdi house even more inexplicable.

Nevertheless, at this point I expect the jury will find Yazdi guilty, because he shot Recio after he was fleeing and no longer on Yazdi's property. There is no evidence that Recio stole anything so Yazdi can't claim he was trying to recover property and the Castle Doctrine would not seem to apply when the shooting took place out in the HOA driveway, not on Yazdi's property.

I can't tell from the newspaper reporting if the prosecuter made any of those points, but unless the jury feels the prosecution flat out failed to make its case, I expect them to find Yazdi guilty of murder. The jury did include a fire arms training instructor so I expect those issues will probably be discussed in the jury deliberations.

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

Which makes Recio's actions at the Yazdi house even more inexplicable.

To be fair, we don't know what his actions were at the house. We just know what Yazdi and his wife told police. Which I agree seems unbelievable.

Originally Posted by CptnRn

I can't tell from the newspaper reporting if the prosecuter made any of those points, but unless the jury feels the prosecution flat out failed to make its case, I expect them to find Yazdi guilty of murder. The jury did include a fire arms training instructor so I expect those issues will probably be discussed in the jury deliberations.

The fact that they are deliberating this long makes me question whether they will reach a guilty verdict, but I do hope that they do. If the neighbor's and police stories are correct, this person needs to be behind bars. IMO.

[Paulmmm]

Originally Posted by atxcio

To be fair, we don't know what his actions were at the house. We just know what Yazdi and his wife told police. Which I agree seems unbelievable.



The fact that they are deliberating this long makes me question whether they will reach a guilty verdict, but I do hope that they do. If the neighbor's and police stories are correct, this person needs to be behind bars. IMO.

I really would have loved for Yazdi and his wife to have tetstified. I know his defense attorney said in his opening statement that his wife would, and I think he said the same about Yazdi. I realize that he's totally within his rights to not testify, but I still would have wanted to hear what he had to say. Otherwise, we just have his lawyer insinuating things, but nobody really testifying to them. Curious that the defense called no witnesses at all.

[CptnRn]

I find it curious that the prosecutor did not make an issue of the fact that Recio was not on Yazdi's property when he was shot. Perhaps that is not as important as I believed, given that it immediately followed an confrontation that was on Yazdi's property. But I guess I'm thinking about that in regard to the "Castle Doctrine". But one's right to self defense applies anywhere. If Yazdi truly believed Recio had a gun as Yazdi's defense attorney asserted, then Yazdi was entitled to defend himself.

The burden to prove the case beyond a shadow of a doubt is the prosecutor's obligation. Clearly some juror's aren't satisfied that occurred given the 6-6 deadlock.

[Trainwreck20]

While, on the surface, I lean toward 'guilty', it is hard to know exactly what the jury is hearing and what instructions they are operating under. It is quite a responsibility to determine that the shooter was guilty 'beyond a reasonable doubt' (I think that is the term) for killing someone. And, of course, I only get to hear what is reported. I personally would like to see a thorough analysis of what was presented, etc., but that doesn't really happen in the press unless it is a national profile case, and even then I am not sure it isn't just cherry-picking what the media thought was interesting. Often, an entire case may hinge on the mundane.

[CptnRn]

Jury remains at impasse in Yazdi trial | KXAN.com

Update: 4:19 p.m. Jurors remained at an impasse nearly 16 hours after they began deliberating.The jury returned to the courtroom around 4 p.m. stating two jurors will not change their mind on self defense.
The judge gave the jury the "Allen Charge," meaning he ordered them to keep working because a mistrial only means 12 other people will have to answer the same question.
Typically, a court will give jurors at least as much time deliberating as they had to hear evidence. In this case, that period was about four days.
Update: 2:30 p.m.
Progress was made, but jurors reached an impasse according to a note sent to Judge Bert Richardson from the jury room.
The note said they stood 10-2 on the issue of self-defense after previously being locked at 6-6. Richardson instructed the jury to keep deliberating.

[woodinvilleguy]

I just heard that he was found guilty

https://twitter.com/chrissadeghi