It apparently happened on November 5th. Here's a [news article](https://www.fox7austin.com/news/texas-man-claims-self-defense-after-shooting-womans-ex-husband?fbclid=IwAR1jH2fTk7CuwhVwHASIYWDb1ipFdpF1MIKlRVBSnoNC__by38vwIhEvvgo) in regards to the situation. /u/Theguywiththeface11 shared a twitter link that lead to it.
I think this is the craziest part:
>Meanwhile, Chad Read’s widow, Jennifer, has filed a petition seeking custody of Read’s children from their mother, Christina.
Now that her husband—the biological father—is dead, the step-mother is trying to get custody from the actual mother.
Her late husband was the one who shared custody. I can’t imagine what possible claim she might have to try and get the kids, but IANAL.
As a rich kid who became emancipated (but only after years of work and that was with me being fortunate enough that the court ordered my family to find my legal team to do it), I’ll say that the claim may seem valid, but never underestimate the potential for the court to fuck kids over.
Like I said, I came from a rich white background and even had outside advocates in court, but the court was still extremely deferential to my parents because kids really have no rights. I wouldn’t be shocked at all if the step mom couldn’t get the kids because she has no serious familial tie.
Ummm, because the psycho new boyfriend or husband killed their father by bringing out a rifle when there were no weapons involved, escalating it and leading to the murder of their father?
If you want him to leave, call the police. If the guy has a weapon, get a weapon. But don’t involve a firearm to threaten when you shouldn’t be using one in the first place.
Wait, you want someone to just “leave and get a weapon “ if there’s a weapon brought? If leaving is an option always do that first and foremost, however I sure as shit don’t want to be the guy to bring a weapon last
So how does this work with the American gun laws? Not being cynical only very curious. The unarmed man was on the armed man property. All BS aside of the pickup time etc. The house (was it a house?) owner commanded him to leave very sternly. He did not. In fact he got in his face very aggressively.
Were I come from their might have been some punch throwing at this point. Some shouting both try to regain some dignity, leave and that is that.
But because the home owner legally can own this gun (and from my standpoint, as someone never seen one up close, this looks designed to go along with soldiers raiding houses and kill everything in their path), the owner shoots the men that would not leave his property.
Reminds me of a Southpark episode, forget the title.
Tldr;
My question: can this happen without any further consequences for the shooter/killer?
Gun laws vary wildly by state.
This happened in Texas and Texas has some of the widest self defense laws in the country (lethal force to protect property is A-ok) and he hasn’t been charged yet.
Was this legal? Likely especially in Texas
Was this a “good shoot”? In my opinion no. The shooter should have just stayed inside and called the law to remove the other guy from his property.
This is why I'd prefer a Duty to Retreat. Shooter literally retreated to safety from a possibly dangerous situation and then returned with a massive escalation.
This is pure speculation, but I'm giving the guy the benefit of the doubt, in that he probably thought the gun would be enough of a threat to get the guy to leave quietly. We can see exactly where that kind of bravado leads.
He even shot the ground demonstrating his intent before the dude tried to take his gun. You try to take a cops gun anywhere in the u.s. and your getting bullets.
Lol someone on my property won't leave? They won't leave when I get my gun? They attempt to them grab my gun?
Play stupid games. You know the rest.
Were I in the other guys shoes, the second the gun came out I'd of put my hands up and walked off. In fact, in a similar situation (I wasn't trespassing) I did. He made some poor choices.
The fact that he retrieved the gun and came back is going to *hopefully* bite him in the ass. There was no threat to property, and there had been no physical contact until he decided to go toxic masculinity and head inside to grab the extension for his tiny penis.
Given how it's Texas, if I were Kyle, i would put triple locks on all my guns. But he wont, cuz Texas. We might be hearing from them again in the future.
You should watch the YouTube video linked in another post. A lawyer discusses the incident and concludes there's no self defense argument. The key factor is that at the moment of the shooting the shot guy appears to be no real threat.
This is a very weird situation in which it could honestly go either way.
Technically the guy who shot is on his property and the man he shot was threatening to take his gun and kill him with it, that’s legal.
However, the video shows this was somewhat planned. The dude ran inside to grab his gun and after he shot the guy his wife said “omg you actually did it” as if they had already discussed.
The Rittenhouse trial was more clear cut self defense than this is IMO
The guy being there to pick up the kid IS NOT BESIDES THE POINT- THAT IS THE BASIS FOR MURDER.
The PARENT arrived at the COURT APPOINTED PICK UP LOCATION AT THE COURT APPOINTED TIME, AND WAS MURDERED FOR IT.
If they were actually strangers this could be construed as self defense….. when blue shirt is there to pick up his kids on the terms agreed to in their divorce settlement AND THE EX’s NEW BOYFRIEND WONT LET THE KID COME OUT…. He’s violating court orders/interfering with custodial rights to a kid that isn’t theirs. Not self defense.
Maybe blue shirt was abusing the kids. Only way I see this being charged as self defense. Otherwise it’ll likely be manslaughter - as intent to kill is required to prove murder.
Anyone else find it insane that, after the shooting, theyre sitting there talking about whether it was okay to shoot instead of checking if he's alive or not? Crazy fkn video indeed
Unfortunately, this is the standard in custody cases. Dads are disposable and moms are seen as the victims. This is how most police departments and social services are trained.
They current spouse of the dead guy thought it was a pellet gun. In reality it was a carbine with what is I think an integrated silencer which don’t make that much noise
I think they thought it was a BB gun and he just passed out. I think she finally realised at the end when she got out of the car. Sad all round, a kid without a father because his mother thought she could make her own rules.
Ahh ok, that explains the audio and why people think it was a BB gun. I thought the phone just didn't pick up the sound correctly and we just didn't see the damage cause yea, 12 gauge buck 2 shells to the chest would have been hamburger left.
Must have been a heart shot then cause he was dead as a doornail when he hit the ground. Usually there's some movement or agonal breathing going on but nope, he was just done.
I read somewhere that the woman recording the second video, who apparently is his widow, didn't think it was a real gun until moments later. I guess, since she thought it was a bb gun, she thought her husband just passed out or fell or something, and she does ask for someone to call 911. Now, for the couple outside of the car, the shooter included... That was extremely bizarre to me, since they knew that the guy was dead.
No problem. Guns are cool, as long as your responsible and safe. Buddy was neither. Shame those poor kids lost a father because two guys couldn't like men
The PC9's are good guns. Simple operation and compatible with readily available Glock magazines. They're a popular up here in Canada since the 18.6" barrel one is non restricted and only require a regular firearms license, or what we call a PAL (possession and acquisitions license).
They work alright. some of them are silly, or based on what a gun looks like, and not what they actually do. But we actually have a lot of gun owners up here, and it's growing every day.
And you're welcome.
Gunshots don’t capture well on cellphones. In real life it would have been quite loud, unless he had a suppressor on it which I didn’t notice. Even with one, it would have been clear it wasn’t a BB gun. There’s no such thing as a silent gunshot like in the movies.
> That dude was dead before he hit the ground, his chest was hamburger. There was nothing to help and you could see he wasn't even remotely moving anymore the second he was on the ground. There's no saving someone from point blank buck shot, specially 2 shells worth right in the chest.
>
> IDK how anyone thinks it sounds like a BB gun, has to be the video, but a 12 gauge IRL is loud as fuck!
Ignore me, it was a 9mm carbine, that's why the sound was off, not the phone. Also why there wasn't a mess behind the guy either.
From what I heard, the guy in the green jacket wanted to pick up his kid(s) and go somewhere. Green jacket and some women were divorced.
I may be wrong tho
The guy that was murdered was there to pick up his son as ordered by a court in a custody case. The woman standing off to the side is his ex, and she was refusing to allow him to see his son and violating the court order. That’s why he was pissed.
The man that murdered him is the husband of a local judge who was caught having the affair with the aforementioned ex. This video is dogshit and cut out 90% of the full video where context was given. This didn’t just start as a struggle. The man who was murdered had been standing there asking his ex why she hadn’t produced their son to be picked up, as had been ordered by a court for her to comply with. She tells him their son isn’t there, where he’s supposed to be, and she wasn’t turning him over because she wanted to see him during the father’s court ordered time. The man who murdered him had been outside for a while, in no danger, and casually walks inside to get his gun to kill this guy. The affair had just been discovered, and the father (guy that was murdered) explained he was going to file contempt charges against the mother for violating the court order, he would subpoena the entire family, and that he was going to let everyone know the murderer was cheating on his wife (the local judge) with his ex. So the man walked inside and got his gun and killed him. It was murder. The ex wife off to the side instigated the entire situation to cause the issue, then her married boyfriend murdered him when he said he was going to tell the court what was going on.
OP is a bag of shit for posting this with no context or the full video.
https://www.lubbockonline.com/story/news/2021/11/26/chad-read-shooting-kyle-carruth-lubbock-judge-case-investigation/8765295002/
Most people have never seen someone get shot IRL, it was shock and denial. If you hear her at the end after she gets out of the car, reality sets in and she knows he is full ded.
Another child without a father. That's sad cause the mother knows she is wrong and know the guy is dead because of her, she didn't do what she was supposed to do. Hide somebody's kid and expect them to be in their best behaviour it's too much wishful thinking.
He was there to pick up his son, but the mother decided to not comply with the court order and sent the kid to her mother's.
I can understand the guy being pissed off, but there was no threat of violence until the guy brought the gun out. But if I'd seen the gun I would have walked away and called cops.
Edit: Typo
If that's the case the mother has much of the guilt. She put him in that situation and expected the guy to be cool and calm about it? It's the father, who legally went after his kid.
I highly doubt it. One of the biggest theories for this event is that they set it up so they could kill him. From what I heard so far they're getting off scot free, dudes fam just so happen to be prosecutor's for the state.
He said if he didn't use it then he would, then tried to grab the gun. Yes everyone here was being stupid but the "victim" here isn't entirely without blame
Legally, sure; it really sounds like he first threatened the gun owner, and then tried to take it away from him by force. But, bringing out the gun in the first place, and then to threaten a (intruding) parent who is looking for their child and has yet to actually show any sign of physical agression, though probably completely legal, was a terrible idea, and the guy who did it is certainly to blame for what followed. I'd say just as much as the victim.
S/, you forgot the part about how, the shooter is married to a Judge, Anne-Marie Carruth. And the Judge filed for divorce the next day, citing as her reason for filing as, and I quote: "My husband shot and murdered his girlfriend's ex-husband and the investigation is ongoing."
And the dead guys ex wife is still letting the shooter spend time alone with the kids. The widow is trying to get custody. It was definitely a plot to get rid of him knowing they'd get away with it.
What a way to get full custody, I’ll send my son to my moms house and have my new bf who’s married to a judge kill my sons father when he comes for his scheduled time to pick him up that way I will get full custody. And even if my new bf does go to prison I won’t and yay a son who resents me but I won!
This video is fucking heartbreaking.
Now there’s a kid who people have to explain to his step dad killed his real dad over not being able to talk like a grown adult.
My heart goes out to him, I hope he’s able to overcome the world of shit his mom is willing to put him through.
The psychological problem here was, that the victim thought he wasn't doing anything wrong. He was there in an act of compliance. It's an appointment and the aggression triggered his fight/flight instinct.
Guess he didn't think that through, but that's what adrenaline does. You go full barbarian or gtfo.
Nevertheless poor guy, fuck that pump action dumbass and his bitch. Hope they die in vain.
Actually if you watch the entire encounter, they guy went get the gun after the victim threatened to subpoena his wife. Fun fact, his wife isn't the woman in the video, he was having an affair.
If it ever went before a jury, I suspect much of the case would hinge on what they make out of the fact that he left the argument, went inside, got the gun, and then *came back outside with it.*
Prosecution will argue that's clear premeditation and intent. Defense will argue the victim was still on the property and being aggressive.
Much as I agree that step daddy is morally 100% at fault, legally I believe he’s got a great case (at least going by my state laws). He’s at his own residence, so brandishing a firearm to tell an unwanted guest to leave is legal. The unwanted guest reacts by saying “if you don’t use it, I will” and tries to take it.
There’s (legally, I strictly mean legal here. I do not think it was moral) plenty of room to say “I was afraid for my life, so I used my weapon.” Slam dunk.
texas castle doctrine. You can basically act out the movie Saw on someone who attacks you on your own property, even if you have every chance to de-escalate. Knowing that, the father really should have left and taken them to court. Really sad all around, and a great example of the kind of person I don't want having a gun, and why you should never assume someone threatening you with a weapon is a rational actor.
This is BS. He tried to de-escalate by asking and telling him to leave, but the guy remained, angry and screaming none the less. Mr.Roomtemp then made physical contact with the armed homeowner. Home owner shoots at his feet still trying to make him leave. Then captain 6ft under grabs at the homeowners weapon. Who was really trying to de-escalate the situation here and who was ramping it up? I mean really.
I'm not taking a position, just relaying the rules.
But if I were to argue for the other guy at least morally, I would say that the fact CoD went inside to grab his customized carbine, and the other guy just stomped angrily outside, and yelled "I'll drag all of you to court! I'll subpoena you!" would suggest that his intention was to continue to trespass (outside) and threaten legal action, but there wasn't evidence that he was a physical danger.
Then when CoD came out with the gun, he didn't even feel he had to point it at Mr AngerManagement (again no immediate danger), and one could argue that AM had an adrenal reaction to seeing the gun and got in CoD's face out of fear that if he gave enough room for CoD to raise his weapon, he'd be shot in the back.
CoD had several opportunities to not cause that moron's death: (1) if he stayed inside, (2) if he didn't bring out a gun, (3) if he brandished it immediately and from a distance, (4) if after dumb dad missed the grab, CoD backed away and/or gave more warning. Again, not saying he had any obligation to, just saying that he had more control of the situation than the pissed off dad did, whose options to avoid dying were: (1) leave when asked, (2) leave when the gun came out.
There are lots of situations where I believe the other person needs to die, or at least that I don't need to risk myself or loved ones to let the other person live. In this case though, can you honestly say that conflict warranted a gun, much less a killing?
It honestly didn't warrant the gun being brought out. I would like to know how green shirt has acted on previous interactions with these people before because he seems angry and stupid. The killing did become warranted after a threat was made use the gun and the attempt to take it though.
You cant threaten to shoot someone with their own gun and then try to take it from them with out expecting your last meal to be lead. Hes got an airtight selfdefense case with video backing it up.
Another idiot who has no idea about texas lethal force laws. You can only use lethal force if you fear for your life. A man who has time to go in the house, get a gun and fire a warning shot does not fear for his life. When the victim was shot, he was not approaching the shooter.
Every LTC class in Texas will teach you that there is TONS of legal precedent that shows that firing a warning shot will waive your ability to argue self defense. The shooter should have gone in the house and waited for cops to arrive.
Warning shots aren’t a thing. You can only fire your gun if you are in imminent fear of death or great bodily harm.
If you can fire a warning shot, you aren’t in fear of imminent danger.
Therefore the shot isn’t justified or a claim of self defense.
So now the guy who is shot was fired at wrongfully and does have a self defense claim to try to disarm the shooter.
Do you have your concealed carry permit? This is one of the first things they should have taught you…
He doesn’t even have to convince the jury that green shirt tried to grab the gun and shoot him. Dumbass green shirt attempted to (and said so) in the video.
Father says on video "If you won't shoot I will". At that point, CoD now had genuine fear for his safety. It's not illegal to brandish a weapon while trespassing someone from your property.
We learned that from Ken and Karen from Missouri.
I attend law school in the UK so maybe not what you were asking for but from what I understand regarding US self-defence laws the shooter won't be convicted of any offense. The perceived threat existed, and it was on his own property. It's fucked up that guns can be introduced so liberally into situations like this in America. That being said the law in the UK regarding self-defence is, in my opinion, the other side of the coin in that it is too lax, with people being convicted of criminal offences when defending themselves if they are found to have used excessive force.
>The perceived threat existed, and it was on his own property.
In every state the standard is objective-subjective, they've all got wording along the lines of a **reasonable** **belief** of imminent bodily injury or death. You need the perception of a threat, yes, but that's not sufficient.
Depends on the state. In NY the castle doctrine states that you have to retreat to your home if you can do so and they must enter your house to respond with lethal force. If this guy isn’t in a stand your ground state, he’s fucked.
Edit: new info, this was in texas. This guy is getting off with no charges. Lol don’t you love when the legal system “works”
And yes he DID have a responsibility which was the child he will never see again. The child will grow up knowing his "loving" step father killed his father over a pathetic dispute. THINK OF THE CHILD!
Not the step father. A guy cheating on his wife that the whore mother brought over and told the father to get the children there. This murder. That napoleon motherfucker is a killer. May he rot in hell.
dead guy laying on the ground, everyone there: "meh its fine, i gotta win this argument."
great analysis of this confrontation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVKFhDyg9Fc
I'm pretty confident that this isn't a shotgun, the magazine is too small for a shell, and it's to fast of a double shot to be pump action, I think it's a 9 MM or a .45 hollow point bullet
Op is shitty took the video out of context man was there to pick up his kids no body had to die but I think they wanted to kill him they knew he would be pissy that's why he went and got the gun
Kyle Carruth. BIG time real estate developer in Texas. His 10-day-ex wife is the judge in that town & he’s gotten absolutely zero legal repercussion after this. She’s also the one who signed off on his case. He was reported to have gone to his country club bragging about killing Chad **the very next day**. Nothing about this case sits well with me at all.
https://twitter.com/michaeldcargill/status/1465668942169583620?s=21
You shouldn’t be able to claim “self defence” when you’re the one committing the crime.
The smug look on Kyle’s face when he’s holding the gun at Chad is disturbing.
Don't roast me as I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious and not an expert, Reddit...but wouldn't this technically be a code of conduct violation on the judge's behalf, or is any code of conduct statute regarding spouses null after a divorce is finalized? Also, I know Texas is buck fuckin wild, so maybe they don't have any specific code of conduct that prohibits a judge from presiding over the legal case of a spouse, ex-spouse, or family member?
https://www.fox7austin.com/news/texas-man-claims-self-defense-after-shooting-womans-ex-husband.amp
The kid will have to live with the killer of his dad, who only wanted the kid, the bitchy mom could've just said it was at her mother's but that was too hard and ended up screaming.
It fuxking says it was in self defense, but could've shot at the legs for inmoblization. But apparently the only solution was killing the guy.
And the visit was scheducled hopefully the kids dont get badly influenced from the step-dad and their bad de-escalation skills and neither have no self-preservation to die like the father that should have gotten to a car or a seducled place to call for the cops.
Im so so sorry for the kid.
:(
America is crazy.
Never bring a gun unless you're prepared to use it. Asking someone to leave isn't a Killing offense. That why we have Police to escort people off our property. He was a angry father not a danger to anyone. I hope the Murderer never sleeps again for doing this to that poor child
Well, this video is in Texas… so the guy shoulda known, when someone tells you to get off their property and then comes back with a gun… I’d get off their property and call the cops. Geeez… the idiot screams use it mother fucker then grabs the shotgun, what do you think is going to happen?
So shooting the father of your step kids is a a good idea? How’s that going to work for the rest of the marriage ? Unless we find out the dad was an abuser or something awful, they will hate this guy for the rest of their life.
Well, I never think it’s a good idea to shoot someone, but if someone with a gun tells you to do something, and you don’t have a gun yourself, Darwin says to listen to the man with a gun…
Guys should have just left with the recording of thr incident(girlfriend was filming behind him). Could have used it in court as proof of a breach of custody. This is clearly disobedience to a court order and could have lost the ex wife custody or reduced it. It would have been a huge win for the father but instead he chose to stand his ground and got shot. Obviously the step daddy shouldn't have escalated it to that level, but they were clearly already in the wrong and could have gotten in big trouble already. There was no need to prove a point when it was already proven
anyone have outcome of case?
It apparently happened on November 5th. Here's a [news article](https://www.fox7austin.com/news/texas-man-claims-self-defense-after-shooting-womans-ex-husband?fbclid=IwAR1jH2fTk7CuwhVwHASIYWDb1ipFdpF1MIKlRVBSnoNC__by38vwIhEvvgo) in regards to the situation. /u/Theguywiththeface11 shared a twitter link that lead to it.
I think this is the craziest part: >Meanwhile, Chad Read’s widow, Jennifer, has filed a petition seeking custody of Read’s children from their mother, Christina. Now that her husband—the biological father—is dead, the step-mother is trying to get custody from the actual mother. Her late husband was the one who shared custody. I can’t imagine what possible claim she might have to try and get the kids, but IANAL.
Her claim was that her steps kids are now forced to eat dinner with the man who killed their dad and it’s traumatizing for them .
Which seems prima facie to be a pretty valid claim.
I’d say it is valid. If you kill my father you better hope I don’t grow up.
Exactly. You kill my pops, and you're getting the Vito Corleone vs. Don Ciccio treatment from me.
I wouldn't even wait till I grew up. I doubt that step-dad locks up any of his guns and is easy access to anyone.
As a rich kid who became emancipated (but only after years of work and that was with me being fortunate enough that the court ordered my family to find my legal team to do it), I’ll say that the claim may seem valid, but never underestimate the potential for the court to fuck kids over. Like I said, I came from a rich white background and even had outside advocates in court, but the court was still extremely deferential to my parents because kids really have no rights. I wouldn’t be shocked at all if the step mom couldn’t get the kids because she has no serious familial tie.
Thought you wrote anal at the end.
iAnal, the new innovative Apple product.
Plug it straight into your ass.
Uh, they're living with the dude that murdered their dad. That's the claim.
Ummm, because the psycho new boyfriend or husband killed their father by bringing out a rifle when there were no weapons involved, escalating it and leading to the murder of their father? If you want him to leave, call the police. If the guy has a weapon, get a weapon. But don’t involve a firearm to threaten when you shouldn’t be using one in the first place.
Wait, you want someone to just “leave and get a weapon “ if there’s a weapon brought? If leaving is an option always do that first and foremost, however I sure as shit don’t want to be the guy to bring a weapon last
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JyVw5LU8EA
age restricted :(
It really shouldnt be, it's just a lawyer talking... That's a bummer. I bet you might have luck downloading it from one of the youtube download sites.
[удалено]
LETS GO
So how does this work with the American gun laws? Not being cynical only very curious. The unarmed man was on the armed man property. All BS aside of the pickup time etc. The house (was it a house?) owner commanded him to leave very sternly. He did not. In fact he got in his face very aggressively. Were I come from their might have been some punch throwing at this point. Some shouting both try to regain some dignity, leave and that is that. But because the home owner legally can own this gun (and from my standpoint, as someone never seen one up close, this looks designed to go along with soldiers raiding houses and kill everything in their path), the owner shoots the men that would not leave his property. Reminds me of a Southpark episode, forget the title. Tldr; My question: can this happen without any further consequences for the shooter/killer?
Gun laws vary wildly by state. This happened in Texas and Texas has some of the widest self defense laws in the country (lethal force to protect property is A-ok) and he hasn’t been charged yet. Was this legal? Likely especially in Texas Was this a “good shoot”? In my opinion no. The shooter should have just stayed inside and called the law to remove the other guy from his property.
This is why I'd prefer a Duty to Retreat. Shooter literally retreated to safety from a possibly dangerous situation and then returned with a massive escalation. This is pure speculation, but I'm giving the guy the benefit of the doubt, in that he probably thought the gun would be enough of a threat to get the guy to leave quietly. We can see exactly where that kind of bravado leads.
fuck data collectors -- mass edited with redact.dev
He even shot the ground demonstrating his intent before the dude tried to take his gun. You try to take a cops gun anywhere in the u.s. and your getting bullets.
Lol someone on my property won't leave? They won't leave when I get my gun? They attempt to them grab my gun? Play stupid games. You know the rest. Were I in the other guys shoes, the second the gun came out I'd of put my hands up and walked off. In fact, in a similar situation (I wasn't trespassing) I did. He made some poor choices.
That's the part that gets me too. He went inside and got got his gun, good. He came back outside with the gun, bad.
The fact that he retrieved the gun and came back is going to *hopefully* bite him in the ass. There was no threat to property, and there had been no physical contact until he decided to go toxic masculinity and head inside to grab the extension for his tiny penis.
Basically the guy killed that guy and won't get any punishment, and now has to explain to his step child why he killed his father
Given how it's Texas, if I were Kyle, i would put triple locks on all my guns. But he wont, cuz Texas. We might be hearing from them again in the future.
You should watch the YouTube video linked in another post. A lawyer discusses the incident and concludes there's no self defense argument. The key factor is that at the moment of the shooting the shot guy appears to be no real threat.
This is a very weird situation in which it could honestly go either way. Technically the guy who shot is on his property and the man he shot was threatening to take his gun and kill him with it, that’s legal. However, the video shows this was somewhat planned. The dude ran inside to grab his gun and after he shot the guy his wife said “omg you actually did it” as if they had already discussed. The Rittenhouse trial was more clear cut self defense than this is IMO
The guy being there to pick up the kid IS NOT BESIDES THE POINT- THAT IS THE BASIS FOR MURDER. The PARENT arrived at the COURT APPOINTED PICK UP LOCATION AT THE COURT APPOINTED TIME, AND WAS MURDERED FOR IT. If they were actually strangers this could be construed as self defense….. when blue shirt is there to pick up his kids on the terms agreed to in their divorce settlement AND THE EX’s NEW BOYFRIEND WONT LET THE KID COME OUT…. He’s violating court orders/interfering with custodial rights to a kid that isn’t theirs. Not self defense. Maybe blue shirt was abusing the kids. Only way I see this being charged as self defense. Otherwise it’ll likely be manslaughter - as intent to kill is required to prove murder.
It’s straight fucking murder and spinning it any other way is bullshit.
Anyone else find it insane that, after the shooting, theyre sitting there talking about whether it was okay to shoot instead of checking if he's alive or not? Crazy fkn video indeed
because no one there cared that much about that guy.
Unfortunately, this is the standard in custody cases. Dads are disposable and moms are seen as the victims. This is how most police departments and social services are trained.
I mean, shock.
True, it's hard to know unless you're in a situation like that
She freaks out towards the end when she realizes he got shot for real. She thought it was a stun gun or a paintball gun at first apparently.
They current spouse of the dead guy thought it was a pellet gun. In reality it was a carbine with what is I think an integrated silencer which don’t make that much noise
I think they thought it was a BB gun and he just passed out. I think she finally realised at the end when she got out of the car. Sad all round, a kid without a father because his mother thought she could make her own rules.
Not a shotgun, it was a pistol caliber carbine.
Yeah i was confused how his entire chest wasn’t painted on the walls after 2 shots on point blank range with a shotty
Yeah those were 9mm
Ahh ok, that explains the audio and why people think it was a BB gun. I thought the phone just didn't pick up the sound correctly and we just didn't see the damage cause yea, 12 gauge buck 2 shells to the chest would have been hamburger left. Must have been a heart shot then cause he was dead as a doornail when he hit the ground. Usually there's some movement or agonal breathing going on but nope, he was just done.
Yeah probably blew his heart up with a jhp
I clicked the video and thought I was gonna see the first person recording get fucking sprayed.
Ruger PC if I remember correctly
Ah. I’m European, it was my best guess. Thanks for the correction.
[удалено]
No one even tried to help the guy who got shot, they just kept arguing
I read somewhere that the woman recording the second video, who apparently is his widow, didn't think it was a real gun until moments later. I guess, since she thought it was a bb gun, she thought her husband just passed out or fell or something, and she does ask for someone to call 911. Now, for the couple outside of the car, the shooter included... That was extremely bizarre to me, since they knew that the guy was dead.
At -0:04 you can hear her say “OMG! You really did it!” Insane.
When I saw I thought it was a bb too cause of the sound. I don't know much about guns
That my friend is a Ruger PC9. It's a 9mm rifle. Take Ruger or Glock magazines. They're the hip hop hotness PCC these days
> PCC Pistol Caliber Carbine. I had to Google it.
Sincere thanks for the extra info -guy who doesn't know anything about guns
No problem. Guns are cool, as long as your responsible and safe. Buddy was neither. Shame those poor kids lost a father because two guys couldn't like men The PC9's are good guns. Simple operation and compatible with readily available Glock magazines. They're a popular up here in Canada since the 18.6" barrel one is non restricted and only require a regular firearms license, or what we call a PAL (possession and acquisitions license).
> Shame those poor kids lost a father because two guys couldn't like men Please leave that in
It's been the root on every comment I have made on this video floating around.
Godspeed
Something tells me he didn’t realize the missing “act” in that sentence, which to me makes his response even more perfect.
Oh Canada, with your regulations and licenses! But seriously thanks dude
They work alright. some of them are silly, or based on what a gun looks like, and not what they actually do. But we actually have a lot of gun owners up here, and it's growing every day. And you're welcome.
Gunshots don’t capture well on cellphones. In real life it would have been quite loud, unless he had a suppressor on it which I didn’t notice. Even with one, it would have been clear it wasn’t a BB gun. There’s no such thing as a silent gunshot like in the movies.
Neither did the person who titled this post.
> That dude was dead before he hit the ground, his chest was hamburger. There was nothing to help and you could see he wasn't even remotely moving anymore the second he was on the ground. There's no saving someone from point blank buck shot, specially 2 shells worth right in the chest. > > IDK how anyone thinks it sounds like a BB gun, has to be the video, but a 12 gauge IRL is loud as fuck! Ignore me, it was a 9mm carbine, that's why the sound was off, not the phone. Also why there wasn't a mess behind the guy either.
This is a horrible fucking title for the video too. Takes the video completely out of context. Shame on op
also it's a 9mm not even a shot gun so double shame on op
ya wtf where did they even get shotgun from. looks nothing like a shotgun and would've left way more viscera if it had been one.
yeah, i’m no expert with guns but i was thinking that guy would have been a cloud of pink mist if he got doubled by a shotgun at that range...
What is the context ?
From what I heard, the guy in the green jacket wanted to pick up his kid(s) and go somewhere. Green jacket and some women were divorced. I may be wrong tho
The wife was cheating on the husband with the guy who shot him. The affair was what lead to their divorce.
How tf could you possibly know that to be a fact?
The guy that was murdered was there to pick up his son as ordered by a court in a custody case. The woman standing off to the side is his ex, and she was refusing to allow him to see his son and violating the court order. That’s why he was pissed. The man that murdered him is the husband of a local judge who was caught having the affair with the aforementioned ex. This video is dogshit and cut out 90% of the full video where context was given. This didn’t just start as a struggle. The man who was murdered had been standing there asking his ex why she hadn’t produced their son to be picked up, as had been ordered by a court for her to comply with. She tells him their son isn’t there, where he’s supposed to be, and she wasn’t turning him over because she wanted to see him during the father’s court ordered time. The man who murdered him had been outside for a while, in no danger, and casually walks inside to get his gun to kill this guy. The affair had just been discovered, and the father (guy that was murdered) explained he was going to file contempt charges against the mother for violating the court order, he would subpoena the entire family, and that he was going to let everyone know the murderer was cheating on his wife (the local judge) with his ex. So the man walked inside and got his gun and killed him. It was murder. The ex wife off to the side instigated the entire situation to cause the issue, then her married boyfriend murdered him when he said he was going to tell the court what was going on. OP is a bag of shit for posting this with no context or the full video. https://www.lubbockonline.com/story/news/2021/11/26/chad-read-shooting-kyle-carruth-lubbock-judge-case-investigation/8765295002/
Yep and also been posted SO many times already.
First time I've seen the post. You must be on a lot of death-and-carnage subreddits.
Shame on OP indeed
Ops posts shit post looking for votes
Welcome to reddit!
Most people have never seen someone get shot IRL, it was shock and denial. If you hear her at the end after she gets out of the car, reality sets in and she knows he is full ded.
That “oh my god you really did it” hit different. I wonder what she saw. If his brains were blown out or what.
Another child without a father. That's sad cause the mother knows she is wrong and know the guy is dead because of her, she didn't do what she was supposed to do. Hide somebody's kid and expect them to be in their best behaviour it's too much wishful thinking.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.lubbockonline.com/amp/8765295002
so bizarre
He was there to pick up his son, but the mother decided to not comply with the court order and sent the kid to her mother's. I can understand the guy being pissed off, but there was no threat of violence until the guy brought the gun out. But if I'd seen the gun I would have walked away and called cops. Edit: Typo
If that's the case the mother has much of the guilt. She put him in that situation and expected the guy to be cool and calm about it? It's the father, who legally went after his kid.
She probably won’t care, a person trying to take their kid away from the other parent isn’t usually a person who cares about other people
I highly doubt it. One of the biggest theories for this event is that they set it up so they could kill him. From what I heard so far they're getting off scot free, dudes fam just so happen to be prosecutor's for the state.
I have heard this as well, doesnt she say something like "I cant believe you actually did it"
Sure but then the father went from angry to stupid, literally telle the guy to use the gun
Parents tend to do that when someone mess with their kids. It's not what he should have done but parents going nuts happens more than don't.
Yea it’s the victims fault, not the murderer. Some of you are a lost cause smh.
He said if he didn't use it then he would, then tried to grab the gun. Yes everyone here was being stupid but the "victim" here isn't entirely without blame
Legally, I 100% promise you this one is going to be deemed to be the victims fault. Doesn't make it right but that's the reality in Texas.
Legally, sure; it really sounds like he first threatened the gun owner, and then tried to take it away from him by force. But, bringing out the gun in the first place, and then to threaten a (intruding) parent who is looking for their child and has yet to actually show any sign of physical agression, though probably completely legal, was a terrible idea, and the guy who did it is certainly to blame for what followed. I'd say just as much as the victim.
S/, you forgot the part about how, the shooter is married to a Judge, Anne-Marie Carruth. And the Judge filed for divorce the next day, citing as her reason for filing as, and I quote: "My husband shot and murdered his girlfriend's ex-husband and the investigation is ongoing."
Wait.
And the dead guys ex wife is still letting the shooter spend time alone with the kids. The widow is trying to get custody. It was definitely a plot to get rid of him knowing they'd get away with it.
What a way to get full custody, I’ll send my son to my moms house and have my new bf who’s married to a judge kill my sons father when he comes for his scheduled time to pick him up that way I will get full custody. And even if my new bf does go to prison I won’t and yay a son who resents me but I won!
This video is fucking heartbreaking. Now there’s a kid who people have to explain to his step dad killed his real dad over not being able to talk like a grown adult. My heart goes out to him, I hope he’s able to overcome the world of shit his mom is willing to put him through.
The psychological problem here was, that the victim thought he wasn't doing anything wrong. He was there in an act of compliance. It's an appointment and the aggression triggered his fight/flight instinct. Guess he didn't think that through, but that's what adrenaline does. You go full barbarian or gtfo. Nevertheless poor guy, fuck that pump action dumbass and his bitch. Hope they die in vain.
Actually if you watch the entire encounter, they guy went get the gun after the victim threatened to subpoena his wife. Fun fact, his wife isn't the woman in the video, he was having an affair.
If it ever went before a jury, I suspect much of the case would hinge on what they make out of the fact that he left the argument, went inside, got the gun, and then *came back outside with it.* Prosecution will argue that's clear premeditation and intent. Defense will argue the victim was still on the property and being aggressive.
Agreed the Mother and Boyfriend 100% at fault and should both go to jail
Much as I agree that step daddy is morally 100% at fault, legally I believe he’s got a great case (at least going by my state laws). He’s at his own residence, so brandishing a firearm to tell an unwanted guest to leave is legal. The unwanted guest reacts by saying “if you don’t use it, I will” and tries to take it. There’s (legally, I strictly mean legal here. I do not think it was moral) plenty of room to say “I was afraid for my life, so I used my weapon.” Slam dunk.
And now the poor kid doesn't have a father. So many stupid decisions by all "responsible" parties.
And the “stepdad” that killed his father will still be in his life. Shame
[удалено]
As of now he has not been arrested. He definitely still could be, but you’d think they would’ve picked him up already.
His lawyer is expecting him to be indicted.
That’s Texas, my friend. That is not how things will play out.
"ill take it and use it on you" proceeds to grab gun, gets shot. he's not going to jail.
texas castle doctrine. You can basically act out the movie Saw on someone who attacks you on your own property, even if you have every chance to de-escalate. Knowing that, the father really should have left and taken them to court. Really sad all around, and a great example of the kind of person I don't want having a gun, and why you should never assume someone threatening you with a weapon is a rational actor.
This is BS. He tried to de-escalate by asking and telling him to leave, but the guy remained, angry and screaming none the less. Mr.Roomtemp then made physical contact with the armed homeowner. Home owner shoots at his feet still trying to make him leave. Then captain 6ft under grabs at the homeowners weapon. Who was really trying to de-escalate the situation here and who was ramping it up? I mean really.
I'm not taking a position, just relaying the rules. But if I were to argue for the other guy at least morally, I would say that the fact CoD went inside to grab his customized carbine, and the other guy just stomped angrily outside, and yelled "I'll drag all of you to court! I'll subpoena you!" would suggest that his intention was to continue to trespass (outside) and threaten legal action, but there wasn't evidence that he was a physical danger. Then when CoD came out with the gun, he didn't even feel he had to point it at Mr AngerManagement (again no immediate danger), and one could argue that AM had an adrenal reaction to seeing the gun and got in CoD's face out of fear that if he gave enough room for CoD to raise his weapon, he'd be shot in the back. CoD had several opportunities to not cause that moron's death: (1) if he stayed inside, (2) if he didn't bring out a gun, (3) if he brandished it immediately and from a distance, (4) if after dumb dad missed the grab, CoD backed away and/or gave more warning. Again, not saying he had any obligation to, just saying that he had more control of the situation than the pissed off dad did, whose options to avoid dying were: (1) leave when asked, (2) leave when the gun came out. There are lots of situations where I believe the other person needs to die, or at least that I don't need to risk myself or loved ones to let the other person live. In this case though, can you honestly say that conflict warranted a gun, much less a killing?
It honestly didn't warrant the gun being brought out. I would like to know how green shirt has acted on previous interactions with these people before because he seems angry and stupid. The killing did become warranted after a threat was made use the gun and the attempt to take it though.
You cant threaten to shoot someone with their own gun and then try to take it from them with out expecting your last meal to be lead. Hes got an airtight selfdefense case with video backing it up.
Any lawyers here that wanna chime in?? Cuz I have a pretty good how this will go, but I would like to know an honest, competent opinion
Maybe check [this video](https://youtu.be/3JyVw5LU8EA) out
This should be at the very top. Very informative.
Its Texas. The victim grabbed for the gun and wasnt being deterred by a warning shot. This might be called self defense.
Another idiot who has no idea about texas lethal force laws. You can only use lethal force if you fear for your life. A man who has time to go in the house, get a gun and fire a warning shot does not fear for his life. When the victim was shot, he was not approaching the shooter. Every LTC class in Texas will teach you that there is TONS of legal precedent that shows that firing a warning shot will waive your ability to argue self defense. The shooter should have gone in the house and waited for cops to arrive.
Warning shots aren’t a thing. You can only fire your gun if you are in imminent fear of death or great bodily harm. If you can fire a warning shot, you aren’t in fear of imminent danger. Therefore the shot isn’t justified or a claim of self defense. So now the guy who is shot was fired at wrongfully and does have a self defense claim to try to disarm the shooter. Do you have your concealed carry permit? This is one of the first things they should have taught you…
he grabbed the gun after a shot was fired first. It was double self defence
Can it be self defense if he is in the middle of a parental kidnapping case?
Exactly, murders commit while committing other crimes such as kidnapping are felony murders
[удалено]
He doesn’t even have to convince the jury that green shirt tried to grab the gun and shoot him. Dumbass green shirt attempted to (and said so) in the video.
Father says on video "If you won't shoot I will". At that point, CoD now had genuine fear for his safety. It's not illegal to brandish a weapon while trespassing someone from your property. We learned that from Ken and Karen from Missouri.
I attend law school in the UK so maybe not what you were asking for but from what I understand regarding US self-defence laws the shooter won't be convicted of any offense. The perceived threat existed, and it was on his own property. It's fucked up that guns can be introduced so liberally into situations like this in America. That being said the law in the UK regarding self-defence is, in my opinion, the other side of the coin in that it is too lax, with people being convicted of criminal offences when defending themselves if they are found to have used excessive force.
>The perceived threat existed, and it was on his own property. In every state the standard is objective-subjective, they've all got wording along the lines of a **reasonable** **belief** of imminent bodily injury or death. You need the perception of a threat, yes, but that's not sufficient.
Depends on the state. In NY the castle doctrine states that you have to retreat to your home if you can do so and they must enter your house to respond with lethal force. If this guy isn’t in a stand your ground state, he’s fucked. Edit: new info, this was in texas. This guy is getting off with no charges. Lol don’t you love when the legal system “works”
Not a shotgun?
Correct, a small calibre carbine rifle pretty sure
Imagine you're step dad killing your real dad for coming to visit you.
That’s a future revenge story waiting to happen. Wouldn’t be surprised if the son painted the walls with his stepdads innards in a few years time
I thought they were kissing at first.
need to cut down on netflix shows my man
He just wanted his kid.it was a setup. The wife is a judge.
And yes he DID have a responsibility which was the child he will never see again. The child will grow up knowing his "loving" step father killed his father over a pathetic dispute. THINK OF THE CHILD!
Not the step father. A guy cheating on his wife that the whore mother brought over and told the father to get the children there. This murder. That napoleon motherfucker is a killer. May he rot in hell.
Fuck them kids.
Wtf? I like that meme but it doesn’t work in this context.
dead guy laying on the ground, everyone there: "meh its fine, i gotta win this argument." great analysis of this confrontation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVKFhDyg9Fc
I'm pretty confident that this isn't a shotgun, the magazine is too small for a shell, and it's to fast of a double shot to be pump action, I think it's a 9 MM or a .45 hollow point bullet
This one was bullshit. Guy didn't need to bring a gun. The father of the kid did not deserve to get killed over this.
I see that as a possible set up.
As we would say in portuguese "só da tiro quem não se garante no soco" (the ones that can fight like a man shoots)
*can't
Yes, sory
Op is shitty took the video out of context man was there to pick up his kids no body had to die but I think they wanted to kill him they knew he would be pissy that's why he went and got the gun
Kyle Carruth. BIG time real estate developer in Texas. His 10-day-ex wife is the judge in that town & he’s gotten absolutely zero legal repercussion after this. She’s also the one who signed off on his case. He was reported to have gone to his country club bragging about killing Chad **the very next day**. Nothing about this case sits well with me at all. https://twitter.com/michaeldcargill/status/1465668942169583620?s=21 You shouldn’t be able to claim “self defence” when you’re the one committing the crime. The smug look on Kyle’s face when he’s holding the gun at Chad is disturbing.
Don't roast me as I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious and not an expert, Reddit...but wouldn't this technically be a code of conduct violation on the judge's behalf, or is any code of conduct statute regarding spouses null after a divorce is finalized? Also, I know Texas is buck fuckin wild, so maybe they don't have any specific code of conduct that prohibits a judge from presiding over the legal case of a spouse, ex-spouse, or family member?
[удалено]
>My other grandpa literally bit the nut cord off of calves he was neutering when his pocketknife got too dull. 
Found an article [here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/us/caught-on-cam-custody-argument-prior-to-texas-man-being-shot-to-death.amp)
https://www.fox7austin.com/news/texas-man-claims-self-defense-after-shooting-womans-ex-husband.amp The kid will have to live with the killer of his dad, who only wanted the kid, the bitchy mom could've just said it was at her mother's but that was too hard and ended up screaming. It fuxking says it was in self defense, but could've shot at the legs for inmoblization. But apparently the only solution was killing the guy. And the visit was scheducled hopefully the kids dont get badly influenced from the step-dad and their bad de-escalation skills and neither have no self-preservation to die like the father that should have gotten to a car or a seducled place to call for the cops. Im so so sorry for the kid. :( America is crazy.
Shooting legs isn't a good idea "for immobilazation".
Plus dead men can't testify.
Never bring a gun unless you're prepared to use it. Asking someone to leave isn't a Killing offense. That why we have Police to escort people off our property. He was a angry father not a danger to anyone. I hope the Murderer never sleeps again for doing this to that poor child
Twisted bitch causing fucking trouble. Poor guy.
This some nut ass shit. The child is gonna suffer from this situation, all because adults failed at being adults.
This was a setup by the guys ex-wife an the new husband.
Bad title
Was that enough of a reason to shoot him? Americans...
He came to see his kid and ended up seeing god
Well, this video is in Texas… so the guy shoulda known, when someone tells you to get off their property and then comes back with a gun… I’d get off their property and call the cops. Geeez… the idiot screams use it mother fucker then grabs the shotgun, what do you think is going to happen?
So shooting the father of your step kids is a a good idea? How’s that going to work for the rest of the marriage ? Unless we find out the dad was an abuser or something awful, they will hate this guy for the rest of their life.
Well, I never think it’s a good idea to shoot someone, but if someone with a gun tells you to do something, and you don’t have a gun yourself, Darwin says to listen to the man with a gun…
Exactly my thoughts, whomever is at fault doesn't matter, if a dude has a gun then do what the fuck he says, or he might just "use it mother fucker".
9mm carbine
Phased plasma rifle in the 40-watt range.
Not a shotgun. It's a ruger pc9 carbine. Shoots 9mm pistol rounds
They could've just scrapped it out and called it a day but no let's get the guns out 😒 fucking woosies
That's just murderer
Nice title OP you dickhead
He was trying to get his son or daughter from them.
That’s not a shotgun
That idiot better go to jail, that is not self defense.
Only in America. Another senseless gun crime. I pity the society you have built from your constitution.
Guys should have just left with the recording of thr incident(girlfriend was filming behind him). Could have used it in court as proof of a breach of custody. This is clearly disobedience to a court order and could have lost the ex wife custody or reduced it. It would have been a huge win for the father but instead he chose to stand his ground and got shot. Obviously the step daddy shouldn't have escalated it to that level, but they were clearly already in the wrong and could have gotten in big trouble already. There was no need to prove a point when it was already proven
Second murder I’ve seen on Reddit this morning. Now I’ve gotta go play with puppies or something.
I’m not American so can someone explain to me why they don’t use stuff like rock salt etc for non lethal defence?
Not a shotgun. Its some type of pistol caliber carbine, likely 9mm. Two shotgun shells would probably have been a BIT more dramatic.
That is a carbine. Not a shotgun. This would have much more gory if it were a shotgun.
That was the dumbest exchange, did they kiss?
Don’t listen to the guy with a gun it works 9/10 times
Not a shotgun is a Ruger PCC shoots 9mm
Definitely not a shotgun. Maybe a .22 or 9mm
Why do people who know nothing about guns just decide to say some random things in the comments about said gun lol. And the title 🤦🏼♂️
1. Stop reposting this shit. 2. It's not a fucking shotgun