A Texas grand jury decided not to recommend charges against a man who shot and killed his girlfriend’s ex-husband in a viral incident caught on video in November.
After three days of deliberation, the Lubbock special grand jury voted not to indict Kyle Carruth, the man who shot and killed Chad Read during a dispute about the whereabouts of Read’s children.
Shortly after the incident, Lubbock Police Department transferred the case to the Texas Attorney General for its review. Lawyers for the AG’s office presented the case to the grand jury.
Following the ruling, the law firm representing Read’s widow vowed to pursue their client’s claims in civil court.
”The criminal justice utterly failed Jennifer Read, the widow of Chad Read,” they said. “Chad Read was involved in a heated discussion with his ex-wife concerning custody of his son. The video shows that Kyle Carruth injected himself into that discussion. We believe there was no legitimate reason for Kyle Carruth to bring a deadly weapon to an argument that he wasn’t even a part of. Chad Read died unarmed, shot, and killed while simply trying to determine the whereabouts of his son.”
Carruth’s lawyer also responded to the ruling.
“We are appreciative of the wise decision of this extremely hard-working, independent, Grand Jury,” David Guinn said. “Rarely does a Grand Jury work for three days on one case alone. Those Lubbock citizens must have learned everything imaginable about every aspect of the case and the people involved.”
As GunsAmerica reported at the time, the incident sparked a furious debate about the proper use of deadly force.
Video from the incident from multiple angles shows Carruth telling Read to “get off of my property,” and then go inside. Read says he is at the house to pick up his son, and Carruth returns moments later with what looks like a pistol-caliber carbine.
“Leave!” Carruth orders Read. “Right now, motherf-ker.”
“Do it,” Read replies, continuing to walk toward Carruth. “You’ll better f-king use it motherf-ker, because Godd-nit, I’ll take it from you and f-king [unintelligible],” Read continues, screaming directly into Carruth’s face and leaning into his body.
Carruth shoots into the porch at Read’s feet, but the larger man does not back down. Read swings Carruth out into the yard, and when Carruth regains his footing, he shoots Read twice.
Read falls to the ground while Carruth stands next to him on the porch. “I told all of y’all to leave,” Carruth says. “None of y’all should be here. I asked you to leave. I did everything. I did not want to do any of this.”
Read died later that day.
Carruth is the former husband of Anne-Marie Carruth, a Texas district court judge.
Carruth’s lawyers argued that the homicide was justified under Texas’ “castle doctrine” while attorneys for Read’s wife argued that Carruth failed to de-escalate the situation and used a gun even though no physical threat to life or property existed, according to KCBD.
No criminal charges or arrests have been made in this case.
A real hard ass, who seen and done a lot of very hard things. I think that this is 1941 and the liberation of Ethiopia from the Italians. But I could be wrong! Grumpy
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) caved to pressure from the anti-gun group Everytown for Gun Safety this week when it revoked the federal firearms license of a gun maker in Nevada.
Everytown joined forces with Kansas City officials in filing a lawsuit against the ATF last year. In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs claim the federal agency had improperly issued a federal firearm license to JA Industries, which the plaintiffs claim was knowingly selling firearms to gun runners.
In response to the lawsuit, the ATF announced this week that they had issued JA Industries a notice of revocation of its firearms license. The agency did not take this action in response to a court order — they did so “voluntarily,” according to their letter. Everytown claims this is a “first-of-its-kind victory for gun safety.”
“We can only hope this decision marks the beginning of a new era at ATF, one that is consistent with President Biden’s commitment to holding rogue and reckless members of the gun industry accountable for breaking the law and putting lives in danger,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. “After decades of serving as the gun industry’s lapdog, it’s time for ATF to do its job and be the American people’s watchdog.”
As GunsAmerica reported last year, Everytown claimed JA Industries and its owner, Paul Jimenez, had been selling firearms to illegal gun dealers in Kansas City. But according to an affidavit written by an ATF agent, it’s unclear how much Jimenez and his employees know about that illegal activity.
The Kansas City gun runner who purchased firearms, James Samuels, usually ordered the firearms from Jimenez and had them sent to a local FFL. At one point, however, Samuels had 11 firearms shipped directly to his house. When Jimenez Arms employees contacted Samuels and asked him about straw purchasing, he claimed that his FFL had moved and assured them that he made buyers pass a background check before purchasing.
In its list of “allegations” against Jimenez, Everytown accuses the gun maker of selling cheap guns “that are particularly attractive to traffickers.”
They also claim that Jimenez was cited in 2012 and 2017 for “serious recordkeeping violations,” but the ATF decided to hold a warning conference in lieu of revocation. If those violations were so “serious,” it’s unclear why the ATF didn’t revoke Jimenez’s license.
Of course, whether Jimenez deserved to have his license revoked is beside the point. Now, Everytown knows to go after gun dealers and manufacturers by suing the ATF, and Biden’s ATF will respond according to their wishes.
JA Industries was an easy target, given its connection to a convicted gun runner. But you can be sure that we’ll see more of these lawsuits while an anti-gun president runs the Department of Justice.
05 August 2019 4:03 PM
Inconclusive Musings About Two Mass Killings in the USA
I do not think I know anything like enough about the two mass murders in the USA to have much to say about them yet. So here are some inconclusive musings.
But I note here that, as in all my writings on such subjects , stupid people are banned from reading what follows. If you don’t know whether you are stupid or not, I also advise you not to read it. If you find yourself thinking that I am trying to excuse mass murder, then that means you are definitely stupid, for I am clearly not doing that. You should go and lie down until the mood has passed. Alas, the stupidity will persist.
As usual, I wait for facts before reaching conclusions, which slows me down among all the others rushing to judgement. Sometimes, as I know from the case of the Quebec City mosque killer, Bissonnette, here… https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/04/reposted-in-the-light-f-new-information-another-mass-shooter-turns-out-to-have-been-taking-mind-alte.html
…crucial facts do not come to light for long months, even years, after these events – if they ever do. In my experience, police all over the world are sublimely uninterested (in Britain actively uninterested) in the drug use of the perpetrators of such crimes, and often only stumble across them by accident.
But there are some features of the El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, killings on which I will comment. As usual, the reporting concentrates upon the horror of the crimes, as it must. It is then swiftly followed by standard-issue editorialising about guns and gun control of the usual sort. This neglects to notice that mass gun ownership is not new in the USA, but dates back to the foundation of the country. Yet these rampage killings only really began about 50 years ago, and have been growing more common in the past five years. So in simple logic, the free availability of guns alone cannot be blamed for these incidents.
But in this case there is also quite a lot about the supposed ‘right-wing extremism’ of one of the two accused, the alleged El Paso killer Crusius. (Not the other killer though, see below) I have discussed the significance of such affiliations here in long posts on the Jo Cox murder here https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/04/my-reply-to-the-secret-barrister-.html
I would also draw readers’ attention to what I wrote about the Charlottesville killer, Fields, two years ago (the caveat still very much applies ) https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/on-the-miserable-events-in-charlottesville-virginia.html
My questions, as to what might have caused Fields to become mentally ill enough to be rejected by the US Army in the first place, were not purposeless. I stick by my belief that, if you find a mentally-ill young person in the modern world, you will almost certainly find a current or former marijuana user. But this grows harder to establish definitively, as police in many jurisdictions long ago gave up even cautions or diversion programmes for those found in possession of marijuana, and are not interested in probing it now. In fact they are positively uninterested, because the connection makes their abandonment of law-enforcement look foolish. So while five or ten years ago their drug abuse might have been recorded, it is not now.
More than a year after his crime, in November 2018, the range of drugs (potentially amphetamines, ‘anti-anxiety’ medication and SSRIs) , which Fields may have been legally taking, possibly all at once, was briefly revealed at his trial: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/james-alex-fields-trial-deadly-charlottesville-white-nationalist-rally-set-n939991 The key passage reads : ‘Fields later told a judge he is being treated for bipolar disorder, anxiety, depression and ADHD.’
‘Treated’, of course, means ‘given drugs’. We still do not know what illegal drugs Folds may have taken before he became mentally ill. But it is not hard to guess.
I recently checked for the latest information on the mass murderer Roof, whose crime has been attributed to a political motive (though as usual it is hard to see how such a filthy act could possibly have aided any cause to which it is attached) and found this https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-dylann-roof-20170202-story.html . His admitted problems include a ‘Mixed Substance Abuse Disorder, a Schizoid Personality Disorder, depression by history, and a possible Autistic Spectrum Disorder.’”
Well, that is pretty much evidence of substance abuse. Which substance or ‘mixed substances’ would you guess might be involved here in the origins of the stated ‘disorder’ ? Me too. Likewise the word ‘Schizoid’ tends to be associated with drug-related mental illness. ‘Depression’ is generally treated with powerful SSRIs, and Autistic Spectrum Disorder can be treated with Risperidone, an antipsychotic. In modern America, none of these things would be considered abnormal enough to merit special note, especially once Roof’s crazed action had been attributed to the white supremacist opinions which he holds, insofar as such a person can be said to hold opinions. To me, and to anyone familiar with the subject of side-effects of legal medications, and indeed the problems associated with marijuana, these are flashing red lights. But they emerged quietly 18 months after he was arrested for the murder of nine people, and long after most people had lost interest in the case.
I have also addressed the subject of the supposed political affiliations of other violent, irrational, apparently politicised persons in this article on the Leytonstone knife attacker, Muhaydin Mire here . (‘You ain’t no Muslim , Bruv!’) https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2016/08/the-man-who-thought-tony-blair-was-his-guardian-angel-yes-really.html
I strongly recommend that you follow the link. There is much fascinating material in it which you will not easily find elsewhere, about unhinged people and religious and political affiliation.
My point is that it is possible for people who are unhinged (usually by legal or illegal psychotropic drugs and sometimes by both in succession) to espouse ostensibly political views, but this does not necessarily mean that they can correctly be classified as political actors. I know too little about Crusius to say anything other than ‘Can we wait for a bit more information?’
But in reports that I have seen, the strong interest in Crusius’s supposed right-wing extremism (I note that the suggestion that he posted a raving manifesto before his alleged crime is as I understand it not yet proven) is not matched by concern about alleged left-wing opinions held (according to the ‘Heavy’ website) by the (now dead) suspect in the Dayton, Ohio killing, Betts . See for example https://heavy.com/news/2019/08/connor-betts/
Attempts to analyse Betts’s Twitter feed (I use his original spellings etc) found that ‘he described himself as “he/him / anime fan / metalhead / leftist / i’m going to hell and i’m not coming back.” He wrote on Twitter that he would happily vote for Democrat Elizabeth Warren, praised Satan, was upset about the 2016 presidential election results, and added, “I want socialism, and i’ll not wait for the idiots to finally come round to understanding.” The Greene County Board of Elections lists his party as “Dem.” ‘. When Donald Trump was elected President he is said to have tweeted that ‘This is bad’.
I don’t propose to make anything of this in itself. Rather the opposite
These vague semi-literate mutterings obviously cannot be used to attempt any link between Betts and the American left. And, by the way, I am not suggesting any equivalence between seething racial bigotry and peaceful mainstream Democratic Party leftism, in case anyone was hoping to pin that on me. They are obviously utterly distinct. To make such a connection between Betts and the Democrats would obviously be absurd. In which case, perhaps some similar caution should be observed in the case of Crusius. This is not to exonerate any purveyors of hate. What they do is wrong even if it has no connection with Crusius. It is to avoid misunderstanding the reasons which led to this crime, because we are anxious to give it a political explanation.
Crusius’s alleged actions may well be as unconnected to his supposed politics as those of Betts, though I doubt my plea for this will get much of a hearing.
What I am saying here ( see especially the Muhaydin Mire case, referenced above) is that crazy people quite often adopt political causes to make themselves feel important and part of a movement. But they do this because they are crazy, not because they are really political in nature. The affiliation is part of their craziness, and can’t be equated with the genuine, rational political affiliations of sane people. The interesting question is ‘why are there now so many more crazy people than there used to be?’
I still wonder what, if anything, these two alleged culprits will turn out to have objectively in common, when we know all that there is to be known about them – if we ever do. But until we do, I must be inconclusive, and speculative. So please don’t tell me I have reached any conclusions here. As Sherlock Holmes always said, it is a capital error to theorise without data. Not, alas, that it stops everyone else.
