[tater]

The article says this, "The grand jury reviewed it and has indicted him for murder."

That's the sum total of the information on charges. It's the major charge, so all that is reported. Are there more?

One count, obviously, one victim. What other charges? Discharging a weapon within city limits? There could be more. What were the lesser charges offered the GJ? You claim they were offered lesser charges, but rejected them. What were they?

The 3d and forth words? Temporary insanity? That's not a charge (unsure if it is a valid defense in TX, too, that varies by state).

The charges don't matter, whatever the DA charges will get indicted 99.999999% of the time. It's apparently an ongoing area of study as the old saw of it being a rubber stamp instead of a check on the DA is true. The GJ will "sign a napkin if you put it in front of them" as they say.

No one has argued that the charge is legally wrong. What those of us that know better have argued is that the GJ process is nothing at all like the trial process, as guilt is not even an issue in the GJ process, just if there is probable cause to have a trial. Every single criminal case has a GJ, so every single case the DA loses loses in spite of the GJ indicting the defendant by definition.

In this case, I don't personally think a guilty verdict is a foregone conclusion because there will be much empathy for someone bumping off a guy he watched murder his kids. A lesser charge would be far more of a sure thing, even if after reading the TX murder statute, I think it is cut and dried murder technically. But again, juries can do whatever they like, regardless of the law.

We'll see how it turns out, but you need to remember that the jury is filled with the man on the street, not legal scholars.