Relatives say he stepped in after girls in the area were approached, while police say the inquiry remains open.
FORT WORTH, Texas — The family of a Fort Worth man arrested after a late-night shooting says he was trying to protect underage relatives, but police have not confirmed that version and continue to investigate what happened outside a south Fort Worth apartment complex.
At the center of the case is Marckus Renfro, 33, who was booked on an aggravated assault with a deadly weapon charge after police said he shot another man in the groin. Officers had already been called to the 3700 block of Century Place on reports that a man, possibly under the influence, was soliciting minors for sexual favors. The wounded man survived and was taken to a hospital, but police have not publicly named him or announced any charge against him.
Relatives have offered a fuller account than authorities. FOX 4 reported that Dontavius Williams, Renfro’s brother-in-law, said a young cousin told family members that a man had tried to lure the children by offering meth and other drugs. Williams said relatives had heard similar complaints before and believed children in the area were at risk. Renfro’s wife, Jamie Ramirez Renfro, said her husband confronted the man, exchanged words with him and then fired when the man turned back and appeared to move toward him. Her account cast the shooting as a sudden street-level confrontation rather than a planned act.
Police, by contrast, have publicly described a much tighter timeline. NBC 5 reported that Fort Worth officers were dispatched at 11:43 p.m. Friday to investigate the child-solicitation complaint. As officers arrived, they heard one gunshot and called it out over the radio. Police then spotted a man matching the earlier suspect description near a convenience store, walking toward nearby apartments, and learned he had been shot in the groin. Investigators said the wound victim had been shot by a group of three people. Renfro, identified as one of them, was taken into custody at the scene.
The difference between those two accounts matters because it goes to motive, threat and timing. Family members have argued that Renfro intervened because children were being targeted and because the situation felt dangerous in real time. Police have not endorsed that claim, and they have not said whether witnesses, surveillance footage or forensic evidence supports it. They also have not said whether the wounded man physically threatened anyone before the shot was fired. That leaves the public record incomplete on the key legal question of why the gun was used and whether prosecutors will view the shooting as criminal, defensive or something in between.
By Monday, the legal picture had become more complicated. CBS Texas reported that Tarrant County jail records showed Renfro facing the aggravated assault charge in this case and also listed other pending charges from earlier cases, including assault causing bodily injury, assault causing bodily injury-family violence, evading arrest or detention, and continuous violence against the family. The station said those records showed a total bond of $50,000. Earlier, FOX 4 reported that no bond had been set at the time it published. Neither report described a final court ruling on the new charge, and police had not publicly explained any later booking changes.
The apartment-complex setting also shaped the reaction. The family’s remarks suggested a neighborhood already on edge, with adults responding quickly to reports involving children. In one interview, Jamie Ramirez Renfro said the incident carried personal weight for her because she had lived through a similar situation when she was younger. Her remarks did not change the official posture of the case, but they showed why relatives have defended Renfro so publicly. For them, the shooting was tied to fear, anger and the belief that children were in immediate danger. For police, it remains a fact-driven investigation built on what officers heard, saw and recovered after the gunshot.
Where the case goes next will depend on evidence that has not yet been released. Police have said only that the investigation is ongoing. The next public steps are likely to include updated booking records, possible court proceedings on the assault charge, and any decision on whether the man first reported for approaching minors will also face charges. Until then, the case stands as a collision between a family’s defense of a relative and a police investigation still sorting out exactly what happened.
Author note: Last updated April 6, 2026.