This won't end well for them.

Texas they will be all right

You got to be smart if you plan on doing some revenge killing........

Texas PC9.41-
(a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.

(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:

(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor;  or

(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.
Texas PC 9.42-
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.

This theft happened in the daytime, and could have been recovered by any other means(wait for the police); as the penal code clearly reads they would have been authorized to use force to recover thier tangible property(truck) but not deadly force.
THey are screwed, and sadly this happens all the time people just dont understand chapter 9 of the penal code.

Don't carry a cell phone and ride a vintage motorcycle.

Thanks for the good news

I bet bigbob is right and their azz is in some kind of trouble with the law. They called the police but did not wait in them and took matters into their own hands
Not condemning them but just saying they should have waited for the PoPo..

If the info from the link is true, not good for the truck owners

It is believed that the truck owners called the police to report the theft before the shooting, but then chose not to wait for officers, according to Soliz.

The family member told police he believed "a firearm may have been pulled by the suspect," prompting him to open fire.
But, Soliz said, police do not know if the suspected truck thief had any weapons on him

One of my clients had his Range Rover stolen from his front driveway on Haynie in University Park almost within sight of the police department. He had a tracking device on it and we found it parked in a cul-de-sac in North Dallas. We didn't approach the vehicle and we called the police. After waiting for a few hours for the police to show up we got fed up with waiting so I just walked to the truck and drove it back to his house. Unless you're in a town that doesn't have many issues and you've got a lot of board officers on your hands you're not going to get a quick response for a stolen vehicle.

Edit: The really odd thing was that nothing was taken out of it and no damage was done to it. They did however leave nearly 60 boxes of Hefty contractor cleanup plastic bags in the back which I gladly took off his hands.

lets circle back next year on this one it will cost them money in defense but they eventually walk with probably time served if convicted of anything

What happened to “he needed shooting” as a legitimate legal defense?

he was driving a stolen vehicle he weaponized. Im with you, Sounds like a win regardless

Bexar County has their own interpretation of the law. I wouldn't want to be involved in a gray area shooting. This will be entirely fact dependent so we will see what the grand jury does.

It's kinda gray, but they could have been waiting a long time for the cops to show and the liberal media went with 'They didn't wait' to put their slant on it. Will be interesting to see if the DA pursues charges.

I am SOFA KING tired of the media siding with the criminals.

Give that man a medal and key to the city.

Unless the suspect produced a weapon during the confrontation, the truck owner will likely go to prison.

Bet he won't do that again

LOVE THIS!!!

But the guy who shot the car thief is toast. As much as you would want to do this. It's now premeditated murder.

Cops get mad when civilians do their job better than they can do it.

I said the same thing about the chick on the railroad tracks

Some of y'all have him in prison already based only on the title of the article worded for clickbait.
Some have him cleared based on boilerplate content that reveals no details of what happened during those final events.

If he shot the thief in the act of stealing the truck he'd be good right? At what point does the act of stealing the truck end? Once he's inside? One he puts the truck in drive? Once it moves from the parking spot? This one could get interesting.

It's getting harder to be a scumbag.