Texas man not facing murder charges for shooting 9 year old while shooting fleeing robber.

Of coooooooooourse Texas lets this man off the hook for killing a 9-year-old who wasn't even in danger. Lethal self-defense or defense of others clearly doesn't apply to this scenario because the robber was already fleeing, hence not posing a threat to anyone else. By law, it stops being self-defense when you and/or others' life is no longer at risk.

You can't charge the good guy with a gun for killing a 9 year old child, Kman. /s

At this point I wouldn't consider the shooter to be a good guy with a gun anymore. But, you know, Texas.

Hence the /s.

Straight from the victim's aunt: "I wish it was Tony Earls who was found guilty", no shit, he's the one who murdered your niece. It stopped being self-defense the moment the robber got away, hence the onus was on the shooter to use a bit of common-fucking-sense since he wasn't stopping a crime as it'd already been committed at that point, but it's Texas, so of course they let the actual murderer off the hook.

I don't know if what this piece of shit did qualifies as murder, but they definitely should have considered negligent homicide.  In any event, I'm betting that even the robbery victims wish that he'd just stayed the hell away. Nothing they lost justified him shooting even a fleeing robber, let alone an innocent bystander. He definitely doesn't need to be around firearms anymore.

He's guilty of at LEAST manslaughter or second degree murder. The law clearly says you no longer have the right to shoot somebody be it in defense of yourself or others once they remove themselves from the situation (or GET removed from the situation via a gunshot and is still breathing), which is clearly what happened here. Not only did he NOT cease fire which he was clearly legally obligated to do, he showed a reckless disregard for the rights and safety of others in the process, shooting a bystander's car and kid all because, get this: he thought the car might've belonged to a gang the robber who was already long gone MAY have been apart of, you can't fucking make this shit up. 

The victim's family is right to blame the scumbag with the gun (not the good guy with a gun), I would've done the same thing, but it's Texas, so of course he gets away with recklessly killing a kid. Not a fetus (or, in many/most cases, a clump of cells), a living, breathing kid who can actually feel pain. 

Or hell, even if you want to make the argument the robber should be charged with felony murder (I don't agree with that because he was already long gone and out of harm's way and on no planet should he or anyone reasonably expect some dumbass would recklessly shoot a 9-year-old in a car maybe, possibly? belonging to a potential conspirator, but for sake of argument), the scumbag who opened fire under the most dubious of circumstances should also be charged with something, possibly even a lesser murder charge. I get why it exists and there's definitely cases where it's justified, but this is clearly a scenario where the onus falls on the shooter to use some common-fucking-sense. In this scenario, you either charge both or charge neither with some kind of homicide.

I really wonder how the grand jury did not pursue this to court. There are laws put into place for such situations and just because someone says they heard shots which is hard to believe from someone who is already running away, that still does not give a person with a gun the right to open fire unless direct confrontation. I would love to know who all makes up this grand jury.

This is a really sad story because as a father, I cannot fathom how I would feel in this situation where you are just driving, and some idiot shoots your daughter in the head. Finding the thief is not going to make this any better because trying to put murder charges on that person may be very hard to sell if it goes to trial and get 12 jurors to agree. It just sounds like some BS to make the family feel better, but I would bet that finding some random stick-up thief who probably did not fire their gun is a lost cause.

While the current president was taking out one of the architects of 9/11, the former president was golfing in Saudi Arabia and downplaying their involvement in said attack:

Does T&E Soft still exist? They could make a True Golf Classics: Muhammad Bone Sawman Course.