17 yr old Kills 15 yr old & Gets Probation

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, bullets13 said:

I kind of get the impression it might be a hybrid of the two situations you mentioned.  The 15-year-old took the weed and ran.  The 16-year-old (at the time) chased him down trying to retrieve his stuff.  He didn’t start stabbing him, he just tried to get his stuff back.  At that point the 15-year-old jumped on him and started thrashing him pretty good, and it wasn’t until this point the 16-year-old took out the knife.  So if I’m selling you an Xbox, you take it and run, I chase you to get it back, then you start beating me up, and THEN I stab you, what’s the opinion?

 

57 minutes ago, baddog said:

For me, I have to distance myself from the sale and theft of the drugs. It comes down to the fight. I’m not sure when stabbing someone is legal. I carry a knife in my front pocket. If someone attacks me unprovoked, then I feel I have a right to defend myself. If I attack someone unprovoked and I bit off more than I could chew, I don’t think I have the right to stab the person I attacked. That’s just me. The courts might see it differently.

Pretty much that is correct in my opinion. A black eye and bloody nose doesn’t justify deadly force no matter who started it.

[tvc184]

8 hours ago, bullets13 said:

I kind of get the impression it might be a hybrid of the two situations you mentioned.  The 15-year-old took the weed and ran.  The 16-year-old (at the time) chased him down trying to retrieve his stuff.  He didn’t start stabbing him, he just tried to get his stuff back.  At that point the 15-year-old jumped on him and started thrashing him pretty good, and it wasn’t until this point the 16-year-old took out the knife.  So if I’m selling you an Xbox, you take it and run, I chase you to get it back, then you start beating me up, and THEN I stab you, what’s the opinion?

I can only make a guess by Texas law.

I think it would still be murder. Remember the three Port Neches kids and the kid from Silsbee a couple of months ago. Apparently the three were  trying to sell some marijuana and they picked up the kid from Silsbee to make the deal. Both sides had at least one gun each and somehow they got in a shoot out in the car. If I remember correctly, the story from the three was it they were selling marijuana and the other kid tried to rob them after meeting under the agreement of buying  it. Basically a dope dealer robbing a dope deal which is not unusual. I think all three were indicted for murder. It is plausible that their story was correct that they were there to sell drugs and had no intention on any violence. Texas law says that you cannot be committing a crime or provoke the encounter  and then claim self-defense. If two drug dealers meet in an alley and get in a shoot out, the loser is usually dead and the winner goes to prison for murder.

There is a part of that Texas law that says if you provoke the encounter, you can again claim self-defense but you have to “abandon the encounter” or “clearly”’ state your intent to abandon the encounter.

So a 17-year-old is selling marijuana. The 15-year-old grabs it and runs. The 17-year-old chases down the 15 year old to complete the deal (crime)  by getting his money or get his marijuana back. I don’t think he gets to claim self-defense at that point. Then your question was, if the 15-year-old started getting the best of him did the 17 year old get to claim self-defense? Answer is yes….. IF he abandoned the encounter or if he clearly stated to the 15 year old and him what he’s no more part of it and try to leave. If they 15 year old continues at that point, yes by Texas law I believe he would get to claim self-defense. I mean you can always claim it but will it stand up in court in front of a jury?

If we are going to what if, what if the 15 year old intended to buy the marijuana and not steal it? What is the 17 year old said  give me $20 and when the 15 year old pulls out a wad of cash, the 17 year old in pulls the blade and says now give me all of it, thereby committing an aggravated robbery? The 15 year old runs not to steal the marijuana but flees for his life. There is a good chance that the 15-year-old was only committing a misdemeanor crime of possessing marijuana and it was a 17 year old who later told  his own version (which is why I think they take away the right of self-defense if you are committing a crime) of events to make it look like he was somehow the victim. 

As baddog said, if you went into the fight and bit off more than you can chew, you don’t get to stab the person (claim self-defense).

While it is certainly plausible that the 15-year-old instigated the incident, I don’t think the 17-year-old gets to make a self-defense claim unless he chased a 15-year-old kid down but after getting his butt kicked, tried  to abandon the encounter and get away himself and the 15 year old continued with the assault. 

In any case a jury almost always will have to make that call with  the evidence presented and the applicable law.  I think it is murder, I think the state of Illinois knew that and charged him with first-degree murder accordingly and the judge is an idiot. By the news story, it seemed like the judge was almost praising him as being an upstanding and bright young kid who just got caught up in a bad situation. Like the question people often ask, if the 15 year was the judge’s  son, would  he think the 17-year-old was a bright young kid and just made a mistake?

[bullets13]

7 hours ago, baddog said:

For me, I have to distance myself from the sale and theft of the drugs. It comes down to the fight. I’m not sure when stabbing someone is legal. I carry a knife in my front pocket. If someone attacks me unprovoked, then I feel I have a right to defend myself. If I attack someone unprovoked and I bit off more than I could chew, I don’t think I have the right to stab the person I attacked. That’s just me. The courts might see it differently.

I agree with this sentiment.  The question is this: if someone steals your wallet from you, and you go after them to get it back and realize you’ve bitten off more than you can chew, would you argue that you were provoked?  I’d say yes. 

[tvc184]

12 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

I agree with this sentiment.  The question is this: if someone steals your wallet from you, and you go after them to get it back and realize you’ve bitten off more than you can chew, would you argue that you were provoked?  I’d say yes. 

 You can use the force necessary to recover your property.  You can trespass to recover property.  

[baddog]

19 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

I agree with this sentiment.  The question is this: if someone steals your wallet from you, and you go after them to get it back and realize you’ve bitten off more than you can chew, would you argue that you were provoked?  I’d say yes. 

Good point. I call it a “Catch 22”

[bullets13]

5 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

 You can use the force necessary to recover your property.  You can trespass to recover property.  

Unless it’s weed? 

[tvc184]

12 hours ago, bullets13 said:

Unless it’s weed? 

I am assuming that’s a jab at IMWT

[bullets13]

10 hours ago, tvc184 said:

I am assuming that’s a jab at IMWT

Just kidding around.  But it does pose an interesting question: if reasonable force is allowed to retrieve a wallet, which could then lead to a self defense claim, perhaps if the situation is the same but with weed the judge may have decided on leniency?  Stupid comments about the defendant and all

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, bullets13 said:

Just kidding around.  But it does pose an interesting question: if reasonable force is allowed to retrieve a wallet, which could then lead to a self defense claim, perhaps if the situation is the same but with weed the judge may have decided on leniency?  Stupid comments about the defendant and all

It was extremely stupid comments. Maybe that’s what the judge was thinking but it does not make sense. It appears that the 17-year-old went into a felony (I am assuming) drug deal armed and with the intent to protect his illegal assets if needed. He basically went into that drug deal ready to kill and did. Except for his age, in some states I believe he might be eligible for the death penalty or life without parole. With that, this judge decided  that he’s a bright kid with a great future and gave him probation.

Insanity….

[WOSdrummer99]

On 12/19/2021 at 7:11 PM, tvc184 said:

Insanity….

$10 blunts is insane.

Edit... I'd agree with you that criminals will be criminals. Like @InMAGAWeTrust said, it should be legal. Delta 8 is readily available at most smoke shops and those blunts are more like $50. Too rich for my taste buds. I'll pass on that. 

Carry on...

Edited December 31, 2021 by WOSdrummer99

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

$10 blunts is insane.

Edit... I'd agree with you that criminals will be criminals. Like @InMAGAWeTrust said, it should be legal. Delta 8 is readily available at most smoke shops and those blunts are more like $50. Too rich for my taste buds. I'll pass on that. 

Carry on...

….. and Delta-8 is a crime is a DA ways to go after it.