ShareThis Page
Slaying of neighbor over music tests Texas self-defense law |

Slaying of neighbor over music tests Texas self-defense law

The Associated Press
| Friday, November 20, 2015 10:24 p.m

HOUSTON — A Houston-area man was found guilty Friday of murder for killing his neighbor during an argument over loud music.

The Harris County jury deliberated two hours before rejecting Raul Rodriguez’s self-defense claim under Texas’ “stand your ground” law and convicting him in the 2010 death of 36-year-old elementary school teacher Kelly Danaher, who was having a party at his house.

Rodriguez recorded the confrontation on his cellphone in video that was shown to the jury. His attorneys argued that he feared for his life and killed Danaher in self-defense.

In the 22-minute video, Rodriguez, a retired Houston firefighter, can be heard telling a police dispatcher he had called that “my life is in danger now” and “these people are going to go try and kill me.” He then said, “I’m standing my ground here,” before shooting Danaher.

Prosecutor Kelli Johnson told jurors that Rodriguez started the confrontation when instead of calmly asking Danaher to turn down the music, he armed himself with a handgun and a camera and proceeded to harass people at the party. Rodriguez lured and provoked Danaher and two other men to come out onto the street and threatened them by brandishing his gun, she said. Danaher and the two other men were unarmed, and Rodriguez’s life was never in any danger, Johnson said.

Defense attorney Paul Sampson argued that Rodriguez went to complain and was confronted by Danaher and the two other partygoers. Sampson said Rodriguez did not pull out his gun until he was standing in the street and Danaher approached him in a threatening manner.

Rodriguez, 50, faces up to life in prison.

Jurors will begin hearing testimony on punishment Monday.

Categories: News | Pennsylvania
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.