He really has no concept of the realities of not being a trust fund baby.
He is considered in Marxist-Leninist terms, a renter capitalist.
Branca really has a talent to get mad at the internet. Didn't he also completely blow up on some law tube adjacent sister on a stream a couple of month ago? I get that he is a boomer but come on you need to have some impulse control. He is also constantly bragging about how much money he makes which makes me wonder if he grew up dirt poor.
Several. Natilethatlawyerchick, Farhan Balanced, Megan Fox to name a few.
Can you (or someone else) give a tl;dr for this? So a guy went up to Rippa's warehouse and put stickers on the windows? Did he do anything else?
I'm failing to see the criminal aspect to this. At least criminal enough to get as sperged out as Rippa is.
I believe Rippa is making the claim they could've filled him with several hot loads
like a night at GAY♂90s or Hedo of lead . Him putting up stickers (I haven't finished reading thread yet) technically falls under Texas Penal Code 28.03 as "Criminal Mischief". See below definition (Emphasis mine):
Sec. 28.03. CRIMINAL MISCHIEF. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner:
(1) he intentionally or knowingly damages or destroys the tangible property of the owner;
(2) he intentionally or knowingly tampers with the tangible property of the owner and causes pecuniary loss or substantial inconvenience to the owner or a third person; or
(3) he intentionally or knowingly makes markings, including inscriptions, slogans, drawings, or paintings, on the tangible property of the owner.
Texas is also unique in the Union (perhaps the world) in a law that authorizes deadly force to
protect property of yourself OR others.
Title 2, Chapter 9, Subsection A 9.42 (2) A and 9.43 (1), "Deadly Force to Protect Property" and "Deadly force to protect third person's property" (Emphasis mine):
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section
9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A)
to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime,
or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A)
the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Sec. 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section
9.41 or
9.42 in using force or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent, or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.
Fucking around at night like
that is criminal mischief. The issue is that Texas jurries (
especially urban/suburban ones where I think his warehouse is) tend to disfavor the statue. See the Joe Horn case where a neighbor shot to illegals burgling a home of a dude who was out of town in Pasadena.
You can argue that he could not protect the property reasonably without force. Jury may not buy it because "just call the cops bruv".
Generally this protection of property defense is used when burglars/methheads/illegals "break in" your property and try to steal your tractor in a barn so you light them up like a Christmas tree with tracers from your .50BMG.
Riley, a known shit-stirrer that works for Dax
Eric asserts that in Texas he could legally shoot Riley
The parking lot is usually considered a public space to my recollection, notice must be given if it is not obviously "fenced" off (eg a gate), be it verbally ("FUCK OFF") or written (No unauthorized entry sign). Relevant statue is
30.05 Criminal Tresspass.
In this case, given the animosity between the two Eric could probably make the argument they were not welcome even without notice. I guess Riley could make the argument his dumbass couldn't comprehend the notice to go fuck off.
Tl;dr
Eric had a nigger moment while saying he was playing FAFO and could've caught lead legally. It is technically true on its face, but there's a high chance the jury will nullify to convict you anyways because of the location and "You shot a guy for that!?". Prosecutor would hammer that statement in a case as "Well he was planning to shoot these two dindu nuthins!"
Side note: Nick has read these exact statues before, I think due to Dumpster Defenders or one of the Kick Vic retards threatning someone. The fact a nigger having a nigger moment has greater legal accumen should explain how braindead he is.
Edit: Sec 30.05 link added, formatting and edits to clarify.
