Claiming self defense after starting a altercation and a warning shot?
- Thread starter samadisoulcrusher
- Start date
News reports show first trial was 10-2 for second degree murder. As the deceased made a verbal threat that he was going to kill the shooter, and apparently turned toward his car, the shooter was in fear for his life.
This was in NM, but if in NJ, Cali, etc. he would need a very good lawyer.
-----------------
He was acquitted, but there is a re-trial.
"But jurors failed to reach a verdict on a lesser charge of second-degree murder, voting 10-2 in favor of convicting Gonzales in the fatal shooting of 35-year-old Abner Antillon.
Jurors reached the verdict on the first-degree murder charge on Thursday after two days of deliberation. The trial began April 23 before Judge Lucy Solimon.
The 2nd Judicial District Attorney’s Office plans to retry Gonzales on the second-degree murder charge, a spokeswoman said. Gonzales remains in custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center.
Minutes before he was killed, Antillon was driving a vintage red International Scout in the 1600 block of Val Verde SW, near Isleta and Blake.
When he heard Gonzales shout “slow down,” Antillon put the vehicle in reverse and stopped in front of Gonzales’ residence, initiating an argument between the two men.
Prosecutors told jurors that Gonzales intentionally shot the unarmed Antillon three times in the back after the two men argued about the speed limit on the street.
Video and audio from a neighbor’s security camera showed that after a brief argument, Gonzales drew a handgun from a holster and fired a single shot into the ground, followed quickly by three gunshots at Antillon as he retreated toward his vehicle.
Antillon was struck twice in the back and once in the arm, witnesses testified. He died at the scene.
Antillon’s killing came about a month after Gonzales testified in the July 2022 trial of his brother, Fabian Gonzales, in the death of 10-year-old Victoria Martens. A judge sentenced Fabian Gonzales in October 2022 to 37½ years in prison after a jury found him guilty of child abuse resulting in death, seven counts of tampering with evidence and conspiracy.
Joseph Gonzales testified in his own defense this week that he fired in self-defense after Antillon “lunged” at him and threatened to kill him.
“I didn’t intend to shoot him at all,” Gonzales told jurors on Tuesday. “I intended to stop the threat.”
Gonzales’ attorney, Ahmad Assed, told jurors that Antillon “had an agenda.”
Antillon “didn’t like being told to slow down in a neighborhood street,” Ahmed said. “He had an agenda of confrontation, and violent confrontation, and a demeanor that was aggressive from the very get-go.”
Deputy District Attorney Christine Jablonsky told jurors in closing arguments that Antillon had no weapons on his person or in his vehicle.
Gonzales “made a conscious decision to shoot Abner Antillon three times as (Antillon) was walking away,” Jablonsky told jurors. “There’s nothing in (Antillon’s) hands. That’s not self-defense.”
This was in NM, but if in NJ, Cali, etc. he would need a very good lawyer.
-----------------
He was acquitted, but there is a re-trial.
"But jurors failed to reach a verdict on a lesser charge of second-degree murder, voting 10-2 in favor of convicting Gonzales in the fatal shooting of 35-year-old Abner Antillon.
Jurors reached the verdict on the first-degree murder charge on Thursday after two days of deliberation. The trial began April 23 before Judge Lucy Solimon.
The 2nd Judicial District Attorney’s Office plans to retry Gonzales on the second-degree murder charge, a spokeswoman said. Gonzales remains in custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center.
Minutes before he was killed, Antillon was driving a vintage red International Scout in the 1600 block of Val Verde SW, near Isleta and Blake.
When he heard Gonzales shout “slow down,” Antillon put the vehicle in reverse and stopped in front of Gonzales’ residence, initiating an argument between the two men.
Prosecutors told jurors that Gonzales intentionally shot the unarmed Antillon three times in the back after the two men argued about the speed limit on the street.
Video and audio from a neighbor’s security camera showed that after a brief argument, Gonzales drew a handgun from a holster and fired a single shot into the ground, followed quickly by three gunshots at Antillon as he retreated toward his vehicle.
Antillon was struck twice in the back and once in the arm, witnesses testified. He died at the scene.
Antillon’s killing came about a month after Gonzales testified in the July 2022 trial of his brother, Fabian Gonzales, in the death of 10-year-old Victoria Martens. A judge sentenced Fabian Gonzales in October 2022 to 37½ years in prison after a jury found him guilty of child abuse resulting in death, seven counts of tampering with evidence and conspiracy.
Joseph Gonzales testified in his own defense this week that he fired in self-defense after Antillon “lunged” at him and threatened to kill him.
“I didn’t intend to shoot him at all,” Gonzales told jurors on Tuesday. “I intended to stop the threat.”
Gonzales’ attorney, Ahmad Assed, told jurors that Antillon “had an agenda.”
Antillon “didn’t like being told to slow down in a neighborhood street,” Ahmed said. “He had an agenda of confrontation, and violent confrontation, and a demeanor that was aggressive from the very get-go.”
Deputy District Attorney Christine Jablonsky told jurors in closing arguments that Antillon had no weapons on his person or in his vehicle.
Gonzales “made a conscious decision to shoot Abner Antillon three times as (Antillon) was walking away,” Jablonsky told jurors. “There’s nothing in (Antillon’s) hands. That’s not self-defense.”
Last edited:
I think many of us have been tempted to say something to idiots speeding down our neighborhood streets, but this just reaffirms why it ain’t worth it. It’s a lose-lose either way. Just MYOB and avoid these scenarios the best you can.
The shooter ,just couldn't keep his mouth shut on the 911 call , what a idiot, he'll get some time , those security cameras and his mouth will make sure of it.
Shooter is going to find out just how expensive being Macho Man is. Especially when he shoots a man in the back that is breaking off contact trying to leave.
These tough guys that can't wait to get their CHL to legally kill somebody need to read Massad Ayoob's book, In the Gravest Extreme. He tells how in even a clearly justified shoot, how much money it's going to cost the shooter not to mention business loss and income.
If this guy is a home remodeler and somehow beats the rap he will be ruined financially.
These tough guys that can't wait to get their CHL to legally kill somebody need to read Massad Ayoob's book, In the Gravest Extreme. He tells how in even a clearly justified shoot, how much money it's going to cost the shooter not to mention business loss and income.
If this guy is a home remodeler and somehow beats the rap he will be ruined financially.
Last edited:
That macho crap sounds good to your buddies but reality is that being a nice guy is a way better plan. I don't take issue with him telling the guy to slow down. When the guy came back he should have just said "hey man, there's kids here, sorry I yelled at you, but could you just slow down a little, I don't want anyone getting hurt". The guy couldn't really say anything to that, and if he did, just let him go. This was just dumb over and over and over and he's going to do time for sure.
That's how I handle the kids that speed through my neighborhood. Talk to 'em like men, with respect. No threats, no asserting dominance, just a man to man conversation with a simple request to please drive safely through the place where kids, and pets are known to be from time to time.
Branden
Exactly. I remember being a dumb young guy and I've sped through a neighborhood before too. Now I don't, but I did a few times when I was younger. I remember a lady just talking to me about it to this day and after she did I thought about it every time since and stopped doing it. So 2 things happened. It worked!!! AND.... no one risked getting shot or imprisoned for 20 years. Seems like a lot better plan
If that gun leaves your holster jail time and massive financial losses are serious possibilities. Your reason for using that gun better be righteous.
Surviving a gunfight or life threatening assault is only a part of it. You now have to navigate the legal minefield to try and stay out of prison, your wife getting tired of waiting for you and banging other men and divorcing you, your lost job or business, your repution in the gutter, etc.
If you plan on being a tough guy, you might leave your guns at home, Bill.
Bad shoot, but Tuff guy shouldn’t have backed up to start something, BTW I appreciate the shooter cutting the engine off of that sweet ride
Last edited:
So you shoot someone in the back. Got off #1 charges, might get hemmed up on #2…on a SECOND trial?? Why can’t he be out of jail?? He IS innocent until proven guilty right?? Despite what the video shows a 10-2 swing-n-miss on #2 IS NOT a Guilty conviction.
SURE…yes...the guy made a REALLY HORRIBLY bad choice to shoot the guy in the back. Looks like the Justice system is just WANTING to make a point. The problem is the PUBLIC made the call….Not Guilty by a 10-2 miss on conviction. So….let’s just keep trying to convict?? When does it end???
In the end sorry about the FAFO game….there’s no rules, no restrictions. You decided to back up your truck to have words….now you are dead. Shot a guy in the back….on trial….same game…same rules.
SURE…yes...the guy made a REALLY HORRIBLY bad choice to shoot the guy in the back. Looks like the Justice system is just WANTING to make a point. The problem is the PUBLIC made the call….Not Guilty by a 10-2 miss on conviction. So….let’s just keep trying to convict?? When does it end???
In the end sorry about the FAFO game….there’s no rules, no restrictions. You decided to back up your truck to have words….now you are dead. Shot a guy in the back….on trial….same game…same rules.
Don't talk to neighbors,ever. I've lived here most of the last 16 years and I bet I've had less than an hour of conversation with all of them. It's wonderful.
He was acquitted, but there is a re-trial.
In almost every state, if you start the altercation you cannot claim self defense. You can't instigate shit, escalate a situation then use deadly force and get away with a self defense claim.
When you carry, you need to be the nicest, most patient person. So in the case you do have to ventilate some asshole, you will have all the sympathy and righteousness on your side. The worse the bad guy looks and better you look, the better the chance you walk way without getting arrested and financial ruin. Imagine how you would be viewed by 12 strangers who are pre-disposed to not like you and think you did something wrong. How would you want to look before them? What would you want the evidence to look like so they see you as a victim and not a perp?
Also many states have a requirement of retreat. Even in a Stand your ground state, shooting someone fleeing/in the back is going to be a real hard
time explaining how they were still a deadly threat to you or other innocents. Police get hemmed up on that and you wont have 1/10th the goodwill or protection they get in the same situation.
If you can't abide by that, you shouldn't carry.
When you carry, you need to be the nicest, most patient person. So in the case you do have to ventilate some asshole, you will have all the sympathy and righteousness on your side. The worse the bad guy looks and better you look, the better the chance you walk way without getting arrested and financial ruin. Imagine how you would be viewed by 12 strangers who are pre-disposed to not like you and think you did something wrong. How would you want to look before them? What would you want the evidence to look like so they see you as a victim and not a perp?
Also many states have a requirement of retreat. Even in a Stand your ground state, shooting someone fleeing/in the back is going to be a real hard
time explaining how they were still a deadly threat to you or other innocents. Police get hemmed up on that and you wont have 1/10th the goodwill or protection they get in the same situation.
If you can't abide by that, you shouldn't carry.
I think I could say something without shooting anyone. I think this guy was looking for a confrontation and he made it happen so he could shoot an unarmed man in the back.
You pull your gun, you had better understand how expensive it is going to be if there is anything in your actions that causes enough doubt for it to go to trial. This idiot had zero need to, and at the very least it is going to probably financially ruin him (and I'm fine with that).
$50-100K without much of an eye blink.
An example of a trial that wasn't even a big one:
The third case was an auto v. auto case with admitted liability and disputed damages regarding a traumatic brain injury (TBI). This trial, which lasted two weeks, had approximately $100,000 in trial costs. We used a trial technician, LiveNote for the judge, daily transcripts, blowups, demonstratives, graphics. We spent $40,000 on retained and non-retained expert witness fees for the experts to testify in person at trial. This was just the fee for the experts to come to trial; it did not include their prior work. We spent approximately $1,000 on jury fees, $9,000 on court reporter fees, $42,000 on blowups, demonstratives, graphics, trial technician fees and presentation of exhibits. We spent $1,200 on witness fees like the firefighter, police officer, and custodian of records. We spent $2,200 on interpreter fees. We conducted three focus groups that cost $11,000.
$50-100K without much of an eye blink.
An example of a trial that wasn't even a big one:
The third case was an auto v. auto case with admitted liability and disputed damages regarding a traumatic brain injury (TBI). This trial, which lasted two weeks, had approximately $100,000 in trial costs. We used a trial technician, LiveNote for the judge, daily transcripts, blowups, demonstratives, graphics. We spent $40,000 on retained and non-retained expert witness fees for the experts to testify in person at trial. This was just the fee for the experts to come to trial; it did not include their prior work. We spent approximately $1,000 on jury fees, $9,000 on court reporter fees, $42,000 on blowups, demonstratives, graphics, trial technician fees and presentation of exhibits. We spent $1,200 on witness fees like the firefighter, police officer, and custodian of records. We spent $2,200 on interpreter fees. We conducted three focus groups that cost $11,000.
And yet none of his problems would have existed if he simply kept to himself.
My asshole Russian neighbors drive like assholes, I do not care. When two of them came speeding thru the 4-way stop on my corner and smashed into each other at 30 mph, I had a good laugh and went back inside while they fought it out, off my property. Didn't shoot anybody. Didn't go to court or need a retrial.
While waiting for the school bus, the neighborhood kids like watching the robot mower, I put googly eyes on it to ward off meth heads. That is as far as friendly goes.
No doubt many of us could, but we know not everyone can exercise the same level of restraint. I have zero interest in engaging with potential hot-heads out there with something to prove over a few words. If there’s something good that can come from it, I’m not seeing it. I’ll just continue to STFU and live to curse all the retards out there in my mind another day.
Agree with you that it seems this guy was just looking for a reason. Dude in the Scout got fucked, but the idiot going to prison gonna to be getting fucked everyday. Not sure which is worse.
I don't see a victim. This one falls into the same category of the guy who was chastising someone for parking in a handicap spot and ended up killing the thin-skinned boyfriend and going to prison: everyone involved is retarded. Telling someone to "slow down" isn't initiating a confrontation. Both people were looking for a fight and found each other. If your ego is so fragile that someone telling you to slow down causes you to stop, reverse your vehicle, and get out, I don't have any sympathy for you. If you're too stupid to immediately break contact with someone brandishing a firearm over a trivial argument, I don't have sympathy for you. If your the type of person to brandish a firearm over a trivial argument, I don't feel any sympathy for you.
I think the best resolution for our species is if Gonzalez turned the pistol on himself so we don't have to piss away more taxpayer dollars trying him or housing him.
I think the best resolution for our species is if Gonzalez turned the pistol on himself so we don't have to piss away more taxpayer dollars trying him or housing him.
First degree murder is laughable.
With that said I would be interested in knowing if there was a firearm in the scout.
Second you don’t shoot am an unarmed person in the back that hasn’t brandished a firearm. ( yeah. If he turns and goes for cover AFTER threatening and producing a firearm I would have no issue with it )
If there WAS a firearm in the scout you damn well better wait until he produces it before shooting.
And no. The dude yelling at him to slow down did not instigate a confrontation, the guy backing up did.
Now back to my peaceful dead end street.
With that said I would be interested in knowing if there was a firearm in the scout.
Second you don’t shoot am an unarmed person in the back that hasn’t brandished a firearm. ( yeah. If he turns and goes for cover AFTER threatening and producing a firearm I would have no issue with it )
If there WAS a firearm in the scout you damn well better wait until he produces it before shooting.
And no. The dude yelling at him to slow down did not instigate a confrontation, the guy backing up did.
Now back to my peaceful dead end street.
That's what I was wondering. You have "the drop" on the guy do you wait to see what he does? Does he get in his pos and drive off? Does he reach inside like he's getting his gat? Do you wait to see the gat then shoot him or the second he reaches in and is not getting in the car you shoot? At what point are you in fear for your life or is that a prerequisite in New Mexico. Is that a stand your ground state? Does that even apply? From what I have gleaned from the video the shooter is claiming the guy threatened his life and that he was going for a gun in his car.
It did seem to me that the victim was attempting to break contact and that's how he got shot twice in the back.
Similar threads
