This is a follow-up to my post Even if they charged him, they wouldn’t get a conviction.

Texas stolen car owner is a ‘vigilante, not a hero’ after he tracked down and shot dead the man who allegedly took his vehicle – claims the suspected thief’s brother

The brother of a suspected car thief shot dead by the man whose car he allegedly stole has slammed his sibling’s killer, arguing he is a ‘vigilante’, not a hero, for his actions.

The robbery victim discovered his car had been stolen from a Texas shopping center parking lot, but managed to track the vehicle down to a second lot nearby.

He walked up to the vehicle to find a man and a woman sat in the cab, and drew his weapon, ordering the pair to get out of the car and wait for police to arrive.

But the stolen car victim was hit with a bullet when the male thief took a gun of his own out from his waistband and opened fire.

Avoiding serious injury, the vehicle’s owner returned fire, shooting the car thief dead.

But now the car thief’s brother has expressed his anger, arguing that the car owner should never have drawn his gun in the first place and complained ‘my mum, my family, we all have to suffer now’.

‘Whether my brother was wrong or right, he had a gun pointed at him. I guess he took it upon himself to defend himself. The guy who shot him is a vigilante, not a hero.

‘A vehicle is not worth taking someone’s life, I don’t care what kind of car it is. You don’t take the law into your own hands. Now my mom, my family, we all have to suffer and just deal with it.’

Police meanwhile put the shooting down to a simple case of self-defense, arguing that robbery victims have every right to try to find their stolen property and that the car’s owner only shot the thief after he himself was subjected to gunfire.

In every one of these cases, where some criminal gets killed by a CCW, the family cries over the loss of their kin, the family can go fuck themselves.

The family here overlooks the fact that their brother was willing to and trued to kill a man to steal his truck.

The thief shot the truck owner to avoid being arrested.  He was being held for the police.

That’s why the police determined it was the truck owner, not the thief, who acted in self defense.

The family can suffer, because their brother almost made another family suffer.

These people are human garbage.

Spread the love

By J. Kb

4 thoughts on “Dead Texas truck thief’s family has opinions”
  1. Perhaps, attempting to get the attention of Benjamin Crump, or other racial grievance advocates by which to profit millions while they lament not teaching their family member about ‘automobile tracking’.

  2. “…arguing that the car owner should never have drawn his gun in the first place…” That is about the only thing said that I even remotely agree with.
    While I agree the shoot appears to be a good shoot (given the additional info), the truck owner did not necessarilly have a reason to pull a gun. At least not what I can tell.
    However, I am glad the police are seeing it as self defense, and it appears to be so.
    Final note, I am surprised the family did not call the dead thief an “aspiring rapper who what turning his life around.”

    1. Texas has a law Penal Code 9.31 section A and Penal Code 9.32 section A – combined they are — A person is justified in using deadly force against another if he would be justified in using force, and he reasonably believes deadly force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force. And 9.32 (A). The evidence does not have to show that the victim was actually using or attempting to use unlawful deadly force because a person has the right to defend himself from apparent danger as he reasonably apprehends it.
      It would be reasonable to believe that the victim (owner of the vehicle) believed he was in an “Apparent Danger” as he viewed this situation. A thief in the process of committing a felony, such as is the case here, and the owner having the right to engage a car thief, should believe he is in fact in serious danger. Under Texas law, he had a right to bring a gun to bear initially.
      Now, was it the best situation to engage a dangerous felon when there was the safer option of calling law enforcement and simply remaining in the background, at a safe distance in order to assist LE in the apprehension of the felon? Yes absolutely. As it turned out, the vehicle owner is lucky to be alive. He took a chance and got lucky the guy was a bad shot. However he had the lawful right to endanger himself.

Comments are closed.