![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The name of this section, whilst accurate, is imo connotated enough in normal usage to suggest that the shooter was a criminal, but it's a minor quibble. However, there are two competing claims as to the date of Mr. Horn's retirement, one stating that he reitred from AT&T in 1998, and one that he retired in 2003; both are wholly unsourced. I thought a comment here would be better than two citation tags for the one discrepancy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.171.129.189 ( talk) 08:33, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Was wondering if perhaps a section (not an article) should be made of the major players, particularly these two since they were apparently part of a major crime ring and a string of robberies in the areas before they were killed. -- Hourick ( talk) 15:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
The two were not a part of a major crime ring. That is not true. Look over the articles again. see stephanie story —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.241.99.48 (
talk)
05:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
These two were part of a major crime ring. Look at the Pasadena Offense report relased to the public.
good job on the cleanup on this article. It's much, much improved since last week. Xdeserted ( talk) 07:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
The statement that most Americans rightly consider Joe Horn to be a murderer needs to be cited. If this statement is backed up by a survey, the numbers should be added in also. If this is a statement of opinion it needs to be removed from the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shuanmo ( talk • contribs) 19:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
The word "rightly" is a value judgment of the results of a survey, and should be removed from the sentence, regardless of any survey results. Leeirons ( talk) 16:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Here is an interesting Wikipedia article that may be relevant to this story. Make My Day State -- Maybe Texas should be added to the list. Deatonjr ( talk) 11:03, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
refers to those states in the United States that allow the lawful occupier of a premises to use violent or deadly force against an intruder no questions asked.
Of course ANY shooting would be under investigation even if it was obvious the homeowner was using it for self defense. While I'm not saying the scenarios has NOT happened (since we're dealing with the human condition), this has a serious bias.-- Hourick ( talk) 15:21, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I've noticed the article "Man who killed suspects shot them in the back, police say" no longer appears on chron.com, or the link is incorrect. Deatonjr ( talk) 15:15, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I ran across this article in today's Chronicle which I think is relevant, but for the life of me, I dont' have the braincells to figure out a way to sit it in properly. Any suggestions? Link Hourick ( talk) 04:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Any updates, was the dude ever indited??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fsu23phd ( talk • contribs) 04:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I have mixed feelings on the removal from this category. This case has the potential for far reaching effects in law, but since the case isn't yet decided, it i not of historical note. On a slightly related note, perhaps it should be put in on the wikilaw? It might be notable enough for that. -- Hourick ( talk) 19:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
I think that it may not be of historical note, because Texas law clearly allows you to do something like this. However, the fact that anyone was surprised for a minute that he was cleared makes it more significant than I would have thought. 63.171.230.113 ( talk) 03:13, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, I'm considering adding it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Law since there are unusual circumstances of this case and supposedly sets a precedent for the "Castle Doctrine" which I'm not familiar with. -- Hourick ( talk) 03:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Hmm the Joe Horn shooting has been at least as entertaining as the Wild West shootouts of yore. Seems like a piece of history to me. Deatonjr ( talk) 21:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
It is stated that this is the first instance (in Texas at least) that someone has been acquitted since the Castle Doctrine was approved in Texas. I've been struggling to figure out how to incorporate it in the Jury's decision section. Anyone have any ideas? [1] [2] -- Hourick ( talk) 19:41, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I had not seen this in previous reports and do not see it in the article. According to the Associated Press, Joe Horn told the 911 operator before he went outside, "I'm going to kill them." The 911 operator was trying to dissuade him from going outside at all. I think the article needs to note that Joe Horn told the 911 operator "I'm going to kill them." before he went outside.
In the 911 call, a dispatcher urges Horn to stay inside his house and not risk lives.
"Don't go outside the house," the 911 operator pleaded. "You're going to get yourself shot if you go outside that house with a gun. I don't care what you think."
"You want to make a bet?" Horn answered. "I'm going to kill them."
After the shooting, he redialed 911.
Besides leaving out the evidence of premeditation, the Wikipedia article also glosses over the fact that both people Joe Horn shot to death were shot in the back. Saftey dance ( talk) 19:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
This information is all pertinent to the article and missing from it. Do you wish to keep it out? Why? If not, how should this sourced information on Joe Horn's statements be worked into the article? How can the fact he shot the two people outside in the back (right as the police arrived and after he said he was going to kill them to the 911 operator) be incorporated? Saftey dance ( talk) 21:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)Mr. Horn, a retired computer manager who testified before the grand jury, called 911 on Nov. 14, saying two men were burglarizing his neighbor’s house in Pasadena, a Houston suburb. He described the men as black.
“I’m not going to let them get away with it,” he told the emergency operator. “I’m going to shoot.” He added, “I’m going to kill them.”
The operator repeatedly told Mr. Horn not to shoot, and the police had just arrived at the scene when Mr. Horn fired three blasts of 00 buckshot from his 12-gauge, striking the men in their backs.
I think it is completely unexcusable for the media to edit out a pertinent factor of criminal intent. The phrase "I am going to kill them" is audible in all recordings of the segmant in question. Some media sources have chosen not to publish this quote for unknown reasons. I applaud all of you for finding and noting this. JurisDoctorMan ( talk) 19:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
In September 2007, Texas law created the " Castle Doctrine", supposedly making it "Legal" for Residents to apply deadly force as a form of self-deffense. That's why Horn himself took matters into his hands making it obvious that if he would have allowed the suspects go then he might as well could have been the one to end up shot. The two deceased suspects (both Colombian nationals/Illegals) Hernando Torres and Diego Ortiz, both shot in the back, either way even if they would have stop to a complete freeze ... Mr.Horn was still going to shoot.
What fried many to burst in fury after Horn's June 30, 2008 grand jury hearing was that he was found "Not Guilty" and was cleared of all charges anyway. It turns out (according to Houston newspapers and other media) that his deffense attorney ( Tom Lambright) and the judge are "FRIENDS", and now many Houston residents are suspecting that this trio's friendship may have played a role in clearing Horn's case ... to many, the grand jury's decision dropped worse than an F-bomb. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.240.252.117 ( talk) 12:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Almost nobody is "in fury" over the decision except a very small percentage of crapheads who don't appreciate the good Joe Horn did. The only reason the left get media coverage on this is because some media want an opposing point of view. There should be more like Joe Horn and he should get an award for community service.
Joe Horn took out the trash. Good for him. Don't want to catch a load of double-ought buckshot in the back? Try not breaking into peoples' homes and stealing their hard-earned property. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.162.7 ( talk) 14:38, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Link to a Time article dated 7/3/08: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1820028,00.html?xid=rss-topstories Contributors to this article should be on the lookout for nationwide reactions to the verdict on this case since it was decided only within the last week. Deatonjr ( talk) 19:04, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
This one happened just up the road from where I live... [3]
If they had been French-Irish would that have been made as prominent? And they weren't American, they were illegals. TheDarkOneLives ( talk) 18:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Will someone please just START a Wiki article on Ersland? http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2009/11/murder-trial-set-for-okla-pharmacist-for-killing-drugstore-robber/1
It looks like the more peaceful people in Oklahoma and the prosecutor's office do not understand the effects of adrenaline. - BG —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.163.127.28 ( talk) 15:56, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Suggestion for article: the last third of: http://www.edmondsun.com/statenews/local_story_309233857.html
"In a case that has stirred debate over vigilante justice and self-defense, Ersland is accused of gunning down 16-year-old Antwun Parker at the Reliable Discount Pharmacy where he worked in south Oklahoma City.
A surveillance video shows two would-be robbers enter the store and one of them point a gun toward Ersland and two women working inside. The video shows Ersland draw a weapon and fire at Parker, who was unarmed, striking him once in the head.
Ersland then chased the other would-be robber outside. The video shows Ersland return about 30 seconds later, retrieve a second gun and fire five shots at Parker, who was lying on the floor.
Defense attorneys maintain that Ersland feared for his life and the safety of his co-workers, but prosecutors say he went too far when he shot the teen while he was on the floor, unconscious, with his hands extended to his sides.
After a preliminary hearing Wednesday, a judge ruled there was sufficient evidence for Ersland to stand trial for first-degree murder.
Parker’s alleged accomplice, 15-year-old Jevontai Ingram, has been charged with first-degree murder, along with two ex-convicts who prosecutors contend planned the robbery and persuaded the teens to carry it out." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.163.127.28 ( talk) 17:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Could someone explain to a non-American reader what 'no-bill' means? I assume this simply means Horn was acquitted, but it's a piece of legal terminology I'm not familiar with, and we don't seem to have a page on it. Robofish ( talk) 15:40, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
"Horn stated that he had the right to use deadly force to defend property, referring to a law (Texas Penal Code §§ 9.41, 9.42, and 9.43) which justified the use of deadly force to protect Horn's home." This is simply not true. I just listened to the call and the closest he came to saying such a thing was "you know the laws have changed since september 1st" and "A shotgun is not an illegal weapon." The way the article writes this, it makes the man seem like he had some kind of great knowledge of the law and he knew that if he killed them it was completely legal, when the only legal reference he made was his rights to defend himself and carry the weapon. Dancindazed ( talk) 20:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
The link supporting "Police initially identified the dead men in Horn's yard as 38-year-old Miguel Antonio DeJesus and Diego Ortiz, 30, both residents of Houston, and of Afro-Latino descent. However, DeJesus was actually an alias of an individual named Hernando Riascos Torres" is broken and cannot be substantiated, especially in reference to them being of Afro-Latino descent. This is not a recognized demographic group in the United States and is obviously someone's open opinion as to their race. Since the article then goes on to talk about them being from Columbia, this further details the lack of evidence to Afro-latino descent. It is an overt attempt to insert racism into the article. The names would also have to be researched as they are both based on the same broken link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.60.147.129 ( talk) 20:32, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Why is Glenn Beck the only one whose reaction is mentioned? I'm pretty sure I remember their being other notable commentators on the Joe Horn shooting controversy besides just Glenn Beck. Therefore,as I've added the expansion tag since the section is currently to short given the degree of controversy this incident created. -- 67.101.223.176 ( talk) 08:40, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Joe Horn shooting controversy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:18, 26 November 2017 (UTC)