Pasadena police say Horn shot 2 men in the back - More on the 'Hero'

Texas Constitution Article I Section 23:

A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect the property of a third person if he reasonably believes he would be justified to use similar force to protect his own property, and he reasonably believes that there existed an attempt or actual commission of the crime of theft or criminal mischief.

Unless this section has been amended, which I don't know if it has or not, then the man was acting according to law.

Horn shot the men to protect his neighbors property, both his house and land and the property that the men had stolen.

note that the above quote says 'protect the propety' it doesn't specify wether the property is being harmed, stolen, etc. so the fact that these people had even the intent to steal justifies Horn's actions.

Nice job Horn. For all of you calling him a murderer, I'm sure if someone broke into your house you'd wish someone had caught them in the act and shot them.

reply to post by orangetom1999


I think the jury is key as well. I also think that the Attorney General of Texas and the District Attorney that serves Pasadena are important as well. The other thing is legal precedent -- that's a huge one. So since we are here at ATS are limited to news reports and sections of law concerning Texas minus references to legal precedents and statements by the Attorney General of Texas and the District Attorney serving Pasadena, I think that if we are going to discuss the matter at all it's best to use the law a a means to state our positions clearly. Otherwise, if we just go on about how we feel, then I just don't know what the point is. I mean, I'm not going to understand the case any better just going on how someone feels. If there are lawyers here, they haven't made themselves known, but given the situation I'm interested in not only how people are feeling about Horn's incident, I'm also interested in what people think about the law.

When laws seem too broad and vague it doesn't matter too much if most folks tend to benefit from those laws. It's when those laws are used to provide benefit to a few that the call is often made for more stringent and well defined laws. Though, when laws appear to be to stringent that allow folks whom the general populace feel should not be affected by the law, then newer more broader defined laws are called for. In this country, the USA, we never have our laws quite right. I suspect it's the same for other countries as well. We humans are not perfect.

We know that when a case goes to court the jury becomes the end all. Many people thought that O.J. Simpson was guilty. Others thought and still do think that he was innocent. Well, the jury got the last word in. The jury may get the last word in on Horn as well. Clearly not everyone will be satisfied with the jury's verdict should Horn's case ever go that far. So, that's why I think referencing the law makes these kinds of discussions much more useful, educational, and beneficial.

No doubt this is an emotional case. It should be because lives were taken and another one is still at stake. If we are going to protect lives then we have to have laws that assist us with that most important duty. To disregard the law at convenience doesn't do most people any good, in my opinion.

reply to post by avingard


That's from Section 9.43 of the Texas laws, and it would only apply if 9.41 or 9.42 applied. It does not apply since Horn is claiming self defense. Section 9.3 deals with self defense.

See:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If I were able to own a gun for protection purposes and was trained in it's use you'd be damn sure that my well being as well as my property would be at the top of my priorities.

Seeing the pictures of these two would also tend to sway my convictions of shooting them!!!! I always thought that if you were placed in this situation it was "shoot to kill" as those "poor victims" may then become the litigants in a lawsuit which could destroy your life after the fact. The victim's rights here superceeding the real victim of the crime, the shooter.

What would happen to these guys if they were arrested? A slap on the wrist and a deportation back to thier country of origin? If they made it here illegaly once, what's to stop them from returning? I for one could live without people like these.

Whomever said innocent before proven guilty in this case ... please.

Bam bam .... the world's a better place without them.

reply to post by motherofsquirrelkiller


Explain how Mr. Horn is a victim?

I was listening to a news radio station out of Houston today. The station stated that the case still has not gone before the grand jury. Not sure if this is the usual timing or if it has to do with the prosecutor.

reply to post by Areal51


I understand what you are saying about the 'legal' issues but I prefer not to try to debate too much on the legal nuances simply because I am not a lawyer and I do not want to pretend to be one on an Internet forum. I will leave that up to the professionals who have been trained in the law. I believe there are several degrees of this case which can be seen as a legal technicalities that can go either way in this case. Technicalities like, does it matter if these criminals stepped into Horns yard - even 1 foot inside? Does it matter if after Horn says don't move that the men might have made a motion toward Horn first? How much did the plain clothes police officer see and what did he think at the time?

So far we know a few legal details. Horn was not arrested at the scene of the incident or crime – however you want to see it. After a police investigation no one has arrested Horn. So far, no city prosecutor has asked for Horn to be arrested or said that they wish to try Horn for any crimes. I'm not saying this cannot change but to me, this speaks volumes about the nature of the case and how any future criminal trial will go.

We also know that in a couple of weeks everything will go to a grand jury who will sit down, read the reports, listen to police testimony and try to figure out if any crimes were committed other than the burglary.



[edit on 10-12-2007 by zerotime]

Now a death threat against Mr. Horn was called into DA's office.
From the Houston Chronicle

The comment about Horn's well-being was left on a telephone message with the Harris County District Attorney's Public Integrity Division on Sunday afternoon. The message, left about 1:50 p.m., is laced with expletives and says even if Horn is not indicted for the two deaths, he will be killed, said Vance Mitchell, a spokesman for the Pasadena Police Department.

"The caller rambled a lot," said Capt. A.H. "Bud" Corbett with the Pasadena Police Department.

Investigators were checking phone records but late Monday had no idea who had placed the call.

"If you don't get an indictment, we're going to kill him and if he goes to prison, we'll kill him there, too," Mitchell said the message suggested.

Guess this isn't unusual. So much for criminals being OK and rehabilitated. My take on the "kill in prison" part. Could just be someone talking trash I suppose.

reply to post by avingard


You have to put the law into context. This is why police officers are given DISCRETION (that'll be our word for the day).

And BTW, nice job of making it a 'revenge' type theme to defend your point.

reply to post by zerotime


I would just like to add that even though any one of us may not be a lawyer, we all should make an effort to understand the law. Our understanding may be limited but it doesn't necessarily have to remain limited.

reply to post by roadgravel


Heh. Sounds like a bunch of talk to me. If it ain't, you can kiss Horn goodbye.

I was talking to some older black people today, and they told me that Pasadena is more than just full of rednecks; they called it a "Ku Klux Klan" town. They say it wasn't as bad as before the 60s, but they say it's still bad enough.

That, along with the fact that most people in US prisons are non-white means Horn's ass is in deep doo doo. The "hero" can't take his shotty to prison, lol.

reply to post by gps777


First of all my family didn't come here until the late 1800's and what lies are you talking about?

by texas law he was in the right. they were armed with the tools they used to break in.

Originally posted by UScitizen


First of all my family didn't come here until the late 1800's

I didn`t ask you for your history.I suggest reading my response to you.

and what lies are you talking about?

WMD`s`dont tell me you havn`t heard? well if not UScitizen let me be the first to tell you,there isn`t any!.Shock horror its about oil and imo global positioning.

A country with superior weapons who steal and lie like thugs,who love to be seen as the worlds hero`s.

Originally posted by slackerwire
Weapons are the tool that gave you the freedom you take for granted today.

Oh really? is that what they teach you in school? I don't think guns have anything to do with our freedoms. Please don't use the freedom speech again.


Our freedom was granted, we shouldnt have to bring it up over and over again.

reply to post by jedimiller

That post most likely was a reference to the Revolutionary War and possibly World War II.

With illegals overloading the hospital system for free care why not also overload the prison system with their care. If they are sent out of the country they end up back here.

I can't find the video yet. (I thought it would be on google or youtube but not yet anyway.) Last night on Fox Oreilly Factor he had the Pasadena Police Information officer on the show.

The information officer basically gave the following description of the events.

The Plain Clothed detective drove down the street and saw the 2 criminals walking side by side in the yard - about a second later the detective saw Mr Horn approach the men and raise his shootgun. The three men were about 10 feet apart. Mr Horn told the men not to move or they would be dead. Now this is when the detective said something strange happened. Both criminals started to run but one of the criminals actually ran in a direction that made him closer to Horn. They gave an example of a face of a clock. If the criminals were at 12 o'clock and Horn at 6 o'clock, one of the criminals ran away at 8 o'clock and the other at 2 o'clock. The criminals essentially ran in opposite directions, but the one that ran toward Horn was the one to cause Horn to fire his gun because of how close they were to each other.

There was no mention of the plain clothes detective feeling afraid for his life or ducking down. They said that he witnessed the entire event and that he got out of his car as soon as it happened.

They also said that the officer at the scene did not arrest Horn because he felt that no crime was committed. I guess that sort of means that the officer who watched this felt it was a justifiable shooting.

Maybe someone will post the video or perhaps it has already been posted but sites like youtube can take a day or two to process the video. Tonight on the Oreilly Factor he plans on having Joe Horns attorney on the show if anyone is interested.

reply to post by zerotime

Thanks for the update. It is starting to sound like the Houston Chronicle reporters are spinning the story along the lines of their own beliefs. I wonder if some of it was confusing information from the police or just reporting style.

I understand all of the points of view posted so far. Texas is different all together. According to the Texas law, the "castle doctrine", says you have a right to protect your property and it may extend to your neighbor's property if that ask you to keep an eye on their house. It's one of the big problems the DA is having. A variety of you are right, these guys were human beings and deserved a trial and not to be shot to death. He didn't have a right to take 2 lives. Sure, I agree; however, the crime rate in Houston and surrounding areas has skyrocketed. A large percentage MAY be due to the city's generosity during Katrina, or the influx of illegal immigrants or just BAD seeds. Interesting enough, there also has been an increase in applications of concealed licenses. If you lived in the Houston Area (in which Pasadena is considered in the area) you would have a little more understanding of the circumstances. Some of the posters are happy assigning the "redneck" personality to this man, but it isn't so. There have been a rash of robberies and burgalries in which suspects have gone from house to house or opened fire on any one witnessing. Also, I guess I should mention that there have been an assortment of death threats for Mr. Horn. One man has gone as far as to call the DA and threaten that if this man is not charged, he will be killed.
[url]http://www.click2houston.com/news/14813727/detail.html[url]

Cheshire Cat,

Thanks for the information on Houston. However I did not know about the proximity of Pasadena to Houston. Obviously my geography is lacking here. Thank you for this geography lesson.

Also I agree with your position of stereotyping of Mr Horn as a redneck. This is often the tack taken by many in labeling people from this part of the country. I have never been impressed with such a tack. It is quite common now days both in the media and among educated peoples in order to play through unchallanged or by default. If this is the case ..education is wasted here.

I am sure that the crime rate in the Houston area is going out of control. This has filtered through the media particularly since the Hurricane recently in New Orleans. Such things are happeing around here too in Virginia...slowly but steadily. The local constabulary are pretty much ineffective except to collect more data and statistics.
The sad truth is that the crime rate is going up in most large citys in America.

Thanks for your post,
Orangetom