Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Did you not read your own reference? It says exactly what I'm saying and that what you're saying was an error.
You have to have both an intentional or knowing mindset and intentional or knowing conduct, not just intentional or knowing conduct.
In other words you have to intentionally shoot and also with the mindset of intending or knowingly not killing in self defense.
No, you misunderstood it. You have to intend the result. It's not murder if you intend to back your car out of the garage and you run over and kill someone whose presence you were unaware of. You have to intend the result (the killing). The fact that you intentionally backed up your car isn't sufficient; it's not a question of intending the act. You need to intend the result.
No, you misunderstood it. You have to intend the result. It's not murder if you intend to back your car out of the garage and you run over and kill someone. You have to intend the result (the killing). The fact that you intentionally backed up your car isn't sufficient; it's not a question of intending the act. You need to intend the result.
The woman claims she was acting lawfully though -isn't that the difference?
No, you misunderstood it. You have to intend the result. It's not murder if you intend to back your car out of the garage and you run over and kill someone whose presence you were unaware of. You have to intend the result (the killing). The fact that you intentionally backed up your car isn't sufficient; it's not a question of intending the act. You need to intend the result.
You have to intend the result of a non-self defense killing to be murder. If you intended and did run over someone with your car because they were carjacking you at gun or knife point you intended the act but are not necessarily guilty of the intentional mindset required for murder. Murder always presumes self defense wasn't the mindset or isn't supported by the circumstances or facts.
The woman claims she was acting lawfully though -isn't that the difference?
She's claiming she shot acting in self defense from what I can tell. So far the charges are saying she acted recklessly but not intentionally or knowingly that it wasn't self defense.
It's a matter of prosecutorial discretion. Either it's because she's a cop or it's because the prosecutor thinks a murder charge is too harsh for anyone under the facts. But it's not because it "better meets the definition of manslaughter in Texas".
In fact, it better meets the definition of murder. If you won't believe me, listen to other lawyers:
You have to intend the result of a non-self defense killing to be murder.
If you kill someone intentionally, that fits the definition of murder rather than manslaughter in Texas. You just heard a bunch of experienced Texas lawyers/prosecutors/judges tell you that.
Quote:
"The term reckless only applies to firing the weapon. . . . If she is saying, 'The door opened, I saw a figure, I thought it was a burglar, I thought it was my house,'" Lollar said, "There is nothing reckless about pulling the trigger. She intended to pull the trigger."
That means he's never heard of a case where someone has shot another in the torso and it not being declared self defense.
No, he meant what he said, which was that he's never heard of someone being charged with manslaughter instead of murder for killing someone by shooting him in the torso. He said nothing at all about self-defense.
Quote:
"I am not aware of a case in which a person shoots another person in the torso, with death as the result, and is charged with manslaughter," Creuzot said. "In Dallas County, the longstanding practice of our law enforcement agencies, in similar cases, has been to charge suspects with murder."
Last edited by hbdwihdh378y9; 09-16-2018 at 03:51 PM..
If you kill someone intentionally, that fits the definition of murder rather than manslaughter in Texas. You just heard a bunch of experienced Texas lawyers/prosecutors/judges tell you that.
No, he meant what he said, which was that he's never heard of someone being charged with manslaughter instead of murder for killing someone by shooting him in the torso. He said nothing at all about self-defense.
If you kill someone intentionally, that fits the definition of murder rather than manslaughter in Texas. You just heard a bunch of experienced Texas lawyers/prosecutors/judges tell you that.
No what those lawyers said in effect was they didn't think she intended to act in self defense. Self defense is not a separate issue. If an intentional killing act is in self defense no murder charges or any other lower homicide charges would be met, unless the person was negligent or reckless. If they were intentional or knowingly killing not in self defense then its murder.
Last edited by mtl1; 09-16-2018 at 06:54 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
