handing over a gun to police after a justified homicide.


PDA






O.F.Fascist
January 5, 2006, 10:10 PM
I've read about and know how after any shooting, justified or not, the police will seize your weapon and hold it pending and investigation.

I was just pondering what if you did not hand over the weapon. Say you shoot someone, call up the police and then go lock up your weapon somewhere safe, and demand they get a search warrent or something first before you just hand it over to them.

If you enjoyed reading about "handing over a gun to police after a justified homicide." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
mnrivrat
January 5, 2006, 10:13 PM
And from this action you expect to accomplish what ?

el44vaquero
January 5, 2006, 10:18 PM
just play along with them

don't do anything that will hold up the investigation

Biker
January 5, 2006, 10:25 PM
You'll fight a fight you can't possibly win and you'll make things harder for yourself in the long run, including the civil trial which is quite likely to follow.
What's the point?
Biker

Hkmp5sd
January 5, 2006, 10:27 PM
Say you shoot someone, call up the police and then go lock up your weapon somewhere safe, and demand they get a search warrent or something first before you just hand it over to them.
At a minimum, you will totally piss off the people that decide whether or not the shooting was legal and you will give the impression you are hiding something.

The gun is evidence in a homocide, whether justified or not. The cops will take the gun as part of the investigation. They even take a LEO's gun after an officer involved shooting as part of the investigation.

It would be about as stupid as taking your vehicle home and locking it in your garage after being involved in an automobile accident in which you decided it wasn't you fault.

FPrice
January 5, 2006, 10:28 PM
I was just pondering what if you did not hand over the weapon. Say you shoot someone, call up the police and then go lock up your weapon somewhere safe, and demand they get a search warrent or something first before you just hand it over to them.

I think that my first impression, "if" I was an investigating officer, would be that you were trying to hide something. Not exactly a good way to start off (for you).

Lupinus
January 5, 2006, 10:29 PM
Don't bother it isn't worth it because it increases your chances of going to jail. It will give the prosecutor more ammo if you are charged, and if not charged for murder you will likly be charged with some form of evidence tampering and obstruction of justice.

GhostRider66
January 5, 2006, 10:31 PM
I would think that the officer(s) could go to nearly any means to collect it at that time even without a warrant based on the fact it was during the investigation. Similar to how they can enter your home to investigate during a crime or immediately afterward.

yucaipa
January 5, 2006, 10:46 PM
demand they get a search warrent or something first before you just hand it over to them.



It's evidence in a homicide Justified or not, you would look pretty stupid telling the boys in jail "I bet the murder rap,but I'm doing two years for obstruction of justice":D

Pilgrim
January 5, 2006, 11:09 PM
I would think that the officer(s) could go to nearly any means to collect it at that time even without a warrant based on the fact it was during the investigation. Similar to how they can enter your home to investigate during a crime or immediately afterward.
A smart homicide investigator, if he does not have the full cooperation of the homeowners(s), will secure a search warrant before continuing his investigation.

Standing Wolf
January 5, 2006, 11:22 PM
What if you stood on your head, wiggled your ears, and whistled your favorite Christmas tunes?

In all seriousness: if you're intelligent enough to keep and bear arms, you should be intelligent enough to understand the importance of cooperating with law enforcement after you've defended your life. That would be no time to start fooling around.

Carl N. Brown
January 5, 2006, 11:55 PM
A self defense weapon should be a standard model
no overly tactical modifications, safe trigger and a
gun with no sentimental value, easily replaceable
because it may end up tagged, bagged and stored as
evidence even in a clean clearly justifiable homicide,
depending on policy in your jurisdiction.

And you should cooperate with authorities without going
motormouth: if you are truly in fear of your life, the
stress and adrenalin will alter your perception and
memory even to the sequence of events. Be prepared
to lawyer up and accept that as the price of your life.

The last thing to do is convince the investigators you're
hiding anything, especially the gun. Be prepared to give
it up as evidence. Under the circumstances, they can
easily get a warrant to search for it, and if you make
them do it, it can only reflect bad on you.

Logistics
January 6, 2006, 01:06 AM
>>>handing over a gun to police after a justified homocide<<<

Just as the po po pulls up.......drop the mag and lock the slide back....set on ground and give a minimum of details till YOUR attorney arrives.

Let the cops connect the dots until you have representation.

Mark in California
January 6, 2006, 02:30 AM
Let me get this straight, after shooting someone you are going to leave the scene of the shooting, go some where else, hide evidence and then demand the police get a search warrent to recover the weapon. After shooting someone you want to play games?

Hope you like prison, because that where you are going. There will be a warrent issued for your arrest for leaving the scene of a crime. (Other charges pending) This will hold you in jail. Also, it will make getting search warrents easy for the police. Search warrents to seach your property and the property of almost everyone you know who could have hidden your weapon for you. You are the suspect, and the police will look no further because you ran.

Forget bail because you ran. You will stick in jail until the trial. Forget self defense because you ran like the guilty. After the trial you will spend a good part of your life in Prison. Not for a bad shooting, but for being stupid.

O.F.Fascist
January 6, 2006, 02:49 AM
Let me get this straight, after shooting someone you are going to leave the scene of the shooting, go some where else, hide evidence and then demand the police get a search warrent to recover the weapon. After shooting someone you want to play games?

Actually I was thinking more in lines of locking it up in the trunk of my car and not mentioning where it was at or anything until I got something more significant that someone's demand to "give me."

Ryder
January 6, 2006, 02:53 AM
I have several guns. Why should it matter if the cops need to borrow one for a while?

Jeff White
January 6, 2006, 03:18 AM
O.F. Fascist,

Let's get one thing straight right from the start. No matter how justified you feel the shooting was, there is going to be an investigation. And until the states attorney says it's justified by failing to file charges, or takes it to a grand jury and they no bill the case or a coroner's jury rules it justified (all these outcomes are possible, depending on the jurisdiction) it's not.

"It was a fair fight sheriff, he drew first" only works in the Western movies. I don't think it worked that way very much in the old west in real life.

Just expect to surrender the firearm you used. Plan for it. Have a backup so you won't be unarmed while the investigation is ongoing..provided you aren't arrested, then being armed most likely will be against the conditions of your bond.

Like Pilgrim said, if you're uncooperative, they will just get a warrant as a matter of course. It won't be that big a deal to the investigating officers. It's probably going to set off some alarm bells when they start evaluating your story.

Jeff

Hkmp5sd
January 6, 2006, 03:50 AM
Not to mention, if they have to get a warrant to enter your house for your firearm, they might have enough cause to get a warrant to search the rest of your house to see what else you might be hiding.

O.F.Fascist
January 6, 2006, 05:24 AM
Not to mention, if they have to get a warrant to enter your house for your firearm, they might have enough cause to get a warrant to search the rest of your house to see what else you might be hiding.

Hmmm I thought search warrents were supposed to be used to look for specific items.

Jeff White
January 6, 2006, 05:44 AM
Hmmm I thought search warrents were supposed to be used to look for specific items.

They are for specific items. It wouldn't be unusual for a warrant to search your home in a situation like that to include your computer and personal papers to investigate the possibility of some tye of relationship between you and the intruder. If the intruder was known to the police as a drug dealer or addict, it might not be out of the realm of possibility for the warrant to specify illegal drugs, after all he could have been there to make a deal.

Either one of those items on the warrant will give the police the right to look into every nook and cranny of your house. Any evidence found while searching for a specific item may be admissible. So instead of handing over your gun, you may have given them access to everything, not just your gunsafe.

That doesn't mean that if you do give your firearm up and other things in your story don't add up, they won't seek a warrant and look anyway. If you are involved in a defensive shooting, expect a police investigation and expect to be intitially treated like a suspect in a criminal case.

Jeff

SomeKid
January 6, 2006, 01:33 PM
...how do you insure that it will be returned?

Is the whole reciept thing a movie idea, or is it real?

Cop: 'Give me your gun'

Citizen: (What to put here?)

Wrong as it is, they will take your gun. So, how to make sure they don't add it to their collection?

Camp David
January 6, 2006, 01:41 PM
I've read about and know how after any shooting, justified or not, the police will seize your weapon and hold it pending and investigation.

I was just pondering what if you did not hand over the weapon. Say you shoot someone, call up the police and then go lock up your weapon somewhere safe, and demand they get a search warrent or something first before you just hand it over to them.

O.F.Fascist: Words of wisdom for you... if this happens, the first thing you need to do is Find the Weapon's Bill of Sale...Turn over the weapon to police as requested. Do not delay... But obtain a receipt from them or a piece of paper from them that indicates that police took your weapon. Then keep this receipt with your Bill of Sale for weapon. You'll need both.

All too often weapons disappear during investigations. Further, if you don't have Bills of Sale for your weapons (or legal transfer records) police can make returning weapon to you difficult. Also obtain name of person taking weapon and don't forget to be sure to enter weapon's registration # (on side of gun) on all official correspondence...

A few minutes to be sure all this is done will pay big dividens later....

Hawkmoon
January 6, 2006, 02:14 PM
Hmmm I thought search warrents were supposed to be used to look for specific items.
And suppose they are looking for "a gun."

At this time, they don't know WHAT gun. They may not even know what caliber. So they go to your house, open the gun safe, and see row upon row of nice, shiny GUNS.

"Which one are we looking for, Sarge?" says the cop.

"I dunno, so we better take 'em all" says the sergeant.

Somehow, I think it just be lot easier and less painful to let them borrow the one you actually usd, and leave the rest of 'em at home.

WT
January 6, 2006, 03:48 PM
Put it in your car trunk and the coppers will hook it up, tow it to impound, then get a search warrant. 6 or 7 weeks later they may release the vehicle.

ARperson
January 6, 2006, 03:48 PM
They even take a LEO's gun after an officer involved shooting as part of the investigation.


Yeah, but I bet the LEO is probably going to get his gun back fairly quickly after it is determined that the shooting was justified. And without much hassle.

CAS700850
January 6, 2006, 04:27 PM
And so would a civilian, at least in my part of the world.

This is just dumb thinking. Let's say you call it in, the first units arrive, and enter the home (exigent circumstances) to determine what happened. See dead guy, see evidence door was kicked in. See wife and/or children hysterical. See you standing there. First question: "Where's the gun?" Why? If you were a cop coming up on the scene of a shooting, regardless of the circumstances, wouldn't you want to know?

Option one...Lock the gun away in the safe and yell "Where's your warrant? I'm not saying anything until I speak to my attorney." So, you get cuffed and patted down "for investigative purposes. Officers secure the scene, meaning everyone gets kicked out, including wife and kids, while they secure a warrant. Warrant will specify that they are looking for any and all evidence relating to the shooting, to include any and all firearms and ammunition located in the home. They come back, hand you the warrant, and take every rounnd of ammo, every gun, maybe even your entire safe. They also look through every drawer, cabinet, and closet in your house for additional guns and ammo. Think of it as a legal burglary, in terms of the invasion of your privacy. Yes, you get a receipt for everything, but that's it.

They take the guns to the lab. Lab guy test fires every gun found in your home at least once, if not more. Anything in the same caliber that was used in the shooting will be fired multiple times to collect bullets for ballistics comparison to bullets recovered from the body. None get cleaned. All get banged around and possibly roungh handled. That nice blued finish on your 1911 or Python will have fingerprints on it, then left to sit in the evidence room until a decision is made as to its disposition.

After the search is completed, you'll be taken to the station for an interview. Now, you say you want your attorney. No longer are you the cooperative homeowner who probably just wants to be safe. You're the guy hiding evidence who wants to lawyer up. So, they arrest you and lock you up. Charge you with some type of homicide and Tampering with Evidence, Obstructing Official Business, etc. You talk to your lawyer, and make one of two decisions.

1. Give statement, but in doing so you will have to admit to Tampering/Obstructing to make the story credible. No one is going to buy anything you say when you take 5A halfway through the statement.

2. Give no statement, which protects you on the Tampering/Obstructing charges, but doesn't let you get your side onto the record. better hope that there are signs of a forced entry or something else to back your story. Also, hope you didn't pick up the bad guys weapon and get your prints on it. Might look like a plant if you did and cannot explain how the prints got there.

So, you get booked on Homicide, Tampering/Obstructing. Case goes to Grand Jury. Grand Jury hears the facts of the shooting, but not your side of the story, and also hears how you were uncooperative and hid evidence. You'll be indicted.

So, you go to trial. At trial, you will have to decide to either testify or not. Don't testify after not giving a statement, it's your right, but the jury will never hear your side of what happened. Trust me, juries want to hear a defendnat say they aren't guilty. Or, you do testify, and you try to explain how you didn't really hide evidence, you were just protecting your rights under the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments when you hid the gun and didn't tell the investigators which one was used. Yeah, that will sell well.

Say the prosecutor has a serious interest in messing with you because of your attitude. Call wife to the stand. Try to get her to testify about what you did after the shooting. She either testifies that you hid the gun, or she picks up a Complicity/Perjury charge.

Option Two...Cops say "Where's the gun?" You say: "Right there, officer. I unloaded it so it would be safe." The collect the gun. They ask for consent to search the house and process the scene. You can say "I will consent to you processing this area, but not a full search of the house until I speak with my lawyer about things." Not quite as good as a yes, but not as bad as demanding a warrant. (Note: the cops will probably get a search warrant for the whole house anyways.) They later ask you for a statement. You indicate you want to speak with your lawyer first, but want to cooperate after you do so. You speak with lawyer, then give a statement. The statement will likley be presented at Grand Jury with the other evidence. If you are fully cooperative, the prosecutor may permit you to testify before the Grand Jury. Case gets no-billed. Any or all of the guns taken for testing will be returned to you.

Which way do you think is better?

Camp David
January 6, 2006, 04:35 PM
Which way do you think is better?I go with your Second Option, but there is a Third Option you didn't detail...

Shoot, Shovel, Forget....

;)

Biker
January 6, 2006, 04:37 PM
Well laid out, CAS. I see no reason not to cooperate unless you're looking to cause yourself grief. Makes no sense at all.
Biker

Hkmp5sd
January 6, 2006, 11:49 PM
Yeah, but I bet the LEO is probably going to get his gun back fairly quickly after it is determined that the shooting was justified. And without much hassle.
So do civilians around here. I even know of cases where the LEO gave the homeowner cartridges to reload their firearm when they stated they didn't have any more bullets in their house.

bruss01
January 7, 2006, 12:40 PM
Don't forget, there are several states where you are prohibited from posessing firearms while either charged with or (I think) under investigation for a felony. I know that in CA they will take them all with only an allegation of domestic violence or mental instabillity (depressed, possibly suicidal etc.) even if you are not present, only alleged to have been present at the time of the incident. Regardless of whether it's true or not. I remember at least one case explicitly fitting that description.

After the shooting, it may have been a justifiable self-defense incident, but they don't know that until they investigate. So they will have to assume it is a drug deal gone bad or domestic violence until they prove to themselves otherwise.

This means they will come and take all of your firearms, even those having nothing to do with the incident. Say your perp was put down with a .357 revolver. They will take your 30-06 deer rifle and your $3000 engraved shotgun as well. Even if there is a "no bill" decision, your firearms have entered the labyrinthine depths of the legal system, and it will cost you big big bucks and a great lawyer to extract them, provided they have not been fed into a crusher in the mean time. Gotta get those dangerous guns off the streets, you know. Sigh.

m39fan
January 7, 2006, 01:33 PM
Why turn it over? Cause I'll arrest your butt otherwise! :fire: It is, as has been mentioned, obstruction of justice. Why are you going to make my job harder than it already is? Many "good shoots" are quick cases to wrap up and you very well may have the gun back in a matter of weeks. In the meantime, look at it as a chance to buy a new gun! Of course, if you're in a small redneck town, we might loan one to you in the interim.

In any event, the gun you use to kill someone else WILL be handed over to me as an investigating officer. You can either give it to me up front or I can get it after dropping you off at the jail and getting the search warrant. I'm NOT a JBT but this kind of attitude tells me I may want to know where you are at all times.... :uhoh:

Just my .02

TexasRifleman
January 7, 2006, 01:37 PM
I've read about and know how after any shooting, justified or not, the police will seize your weapon and hold it pending and investigation.

I was just pondering what if you did not hand over the weapon. Say you shoot someone, call up the police and then go lock up your weapon somewhere safe, and demand they get a search warrent or something first before you just hand it over to them.


Dude, are you sure you live in Texas? Read the papers on these kinds of justified shoots. At least in the Ft Worth area the weapon is very rarely seized.

Did you read the shooting grandmother story in Arlington, TX a while back? She kept her weapon, as do most of the folks around here. If you're shoot is clearly good, it's also clear who the victim is.

Art Eatman
January 7, 2006, 01:38 PM
Most states, SFAIK, it's in the law that a cop's job includes gathering all pertinent evidence for an investigation. Shootings of whatever sort are followed by investigations. The guns used in any shootings are evidence.

So it's a good shoot. Great. You try not to give up the firearm, you're now breaking the law by interfering with an investigation. Why, after showing some smarts by saving your own life, become overwhelmed by an attack of terminal stupid by alienating those who are following the law as it's written?

Art

thumper723
January 7, 2006, 01:47 PM
While I would NOT want to have to hand over my sidearm, if it is required in their investigation, I just want a reiept that they took it, so I can get it back when they are done.

Not sure on the legality of buying another gun while you are under investigation for a shooting (even justified beyond a doubt). Better reason to go buy another NOW :D :neener:

AF_INT1N0
January 7, 2006, 02:20 PM
This is way it's a darn good idea to have more than one gun...

Also in a shoot.. the on scene cops can be your best friend...Or your worst enemy..

Treat him accordingly

progunner1957
January 7, 2006, 02:39 PM
there is a Third Option you didn't detail...
Shoot, Shovel, Forget....


Not smart, not smart at all!!! This course of action will eventually result in an extended stay with large, powerlifting men who want to make you their wife/girlfriend/concubine or just plain old "bitch.":what:

Noooooooooooo, thanks!!

V4Vendetta
January 7, 2006, 02:42 PM
"I'm NOT a JBT"


What's that?:confused:

thumper723
January 7, 2006, 02:48 PM
Jack Booted Thug

Some people think all LEO/Military/GovtCivillians are Jack Booted Thugs that are trying to take us all to concentration camps or something to that effect.

I am Military, but I sure as he!! am not a JBT.

Rockstar
January 7, 2006, 03:03 PM
Don't forget, there are several states where you are prohibited from posessing firearms while either charged with or (I think) under investigation for a felony. I know that in CA they will take them all with only an allegation of domestic violence or mental instabillity (depressed, possibly suicidal etc.) even if you are not present, only alleged to have been present at the time of the incident. Regardless of whether it's true or not. I remember at least one case explicitly fitting that description.

After the shooting, it may have been a justifiable self-defense incident, but they don't know that until they investigate. So they will have to assume it is a drug deal gone bad or domestic violence until they prove to themselves otherwise.

This means they will come and take all of your firearms, even those having nothing to do with the incident. Say your perp was put down with a .357 revolver. They will take your 30-06 deer rifle and your $3000 engraved shotgun as well. Even if there is a "no bill" decision, your firearms have entered the labyrinthine depths of the legal system, and it will cost you big big bucks and a great lawyer to extract them, provided they have not been fed into a crusher in the mean time. Gotta get those dangerous guns off the streets, you know. Sigh.


Brusso: If you ever get into a bind, do yourself the biggest favor you could ever do for yourself and hire a competent lawyer. You sure as hell don't want to trust your instincts or current understanding of the law. ;)

Biker
January 7, 2006, 03:06 PM
This is way it's a darn good idea to have more than one gun...

Also in a shoot.. the on scene cops can be your best friend...Or your worst enemy..

Treat him accordingly
If wiser words concerning this subject have been spoken, I haven't heard them yet.
:)
Biker

FPrice
January 7, 2006, 03:13 PM
"I'm NOT a JBT"


What's that?:confused:

JBT = Jack-Booted Thug. A reference to heavy-handed police activities first attributed to Rep John Dingle (D-MI I believe), especially in regards to anti-firearms and freedom behavior. Later used by the NRA in a letter which resulted in Bush 41's now-famous letter and resignation from the NRA shortly after the Oklahoma City bombing.

Most reputable pro-gun people have backed away from this unfortunate phrase but the damage has been done. Anti-gun forces bring this out every so often in an effort to show that the NRA and pro-gun people are against all LEOs and all efforts to improve LE safety..

newfalguy101
January 7, 2006, 03:27 PM
Which way do you think is better?

I'll choose option 4

Avoid the situation to begin with and no problemo.

As to the original question, just turn it over, any other choice will at the least cause you headaches and at worst a hineyache cuz bubba's meaner than you are!!!!!!!!

hso
January 7, 2006, 03:52 PM
I was just pondering what if you did not hand over the weapon. Say you shoot someone, call up the police and then go lock up your weapon somewhere safe, and demand they get a search warrent or something first before you just hand it over to them.

What logical reason could you have for interfering with a homicide investigation that will prove that you shot someone in self defense? The gun is evidence in the investigation and there's nothing you can do to keep it out of the hands of the investigators if they think they need it. You can't accomplish anything constructive by being a PITA. Safe the gun, record the information on make, model and serial number, give it to the investigators and request a receipt. Make sure you give the investigators a gun rug with a bullfrog patch in it if you're concerned about the firearms return condition.

Strings
January 7, 2006, 05:08 PM
>record the information on make, model and serial number,<

I keep seeing this mentioned. You mean y'all don't already HAVE a listing of every gun's make, model, finish, etc?

A basic Excel spreadsheet can take care of that (I actually use that AND a program on my Palm, and pictures of every gun with an inset of the SN stored on a thumb drive)...

CWatson
January 7, 2006, 05:31 PM
A shooting buddy of mine shot and killed a armed robber and wounded a second in his store. He had to turned over the revolver used to shoot them with but not the shotgun he used (did not fire it) to hold off their gang trying to rush in to attack him immediately afterwards.

No charges were filed agianst him and the revolver was returned in about eight weeks. This was about seven years ago in Los Angeles Ca.

CW

Double Naught Spy
January 7, 2006, 06:17 PM
I was just pondering what if you did not hand over the weapon. Say you shoot someone, call up the police and then go lock up your weapon somewhere safe, and demand they get a search warrent or something first before you just hand it over to them.

More than likely, given that you are obviously hiding something because you will not grant access to the weapon used in the shooting. People who act in said manner often do so because they did do something wrong. Count on the police trying to figure out what it is you did wrong and are trying to hide.

Also count on being arrested. Even if the shooting is clearly justified, but refusing to present evidence that will further substantiate your story will indicate to the cops that said evidence probably won't substantiate your story and what appears to be clearly justified probably is not justified.

It will not make them happy and they certainly will not be inclined to give you any benefit of a doubt and they won't be inclined to work in as expediant of a manner as they can work.

So tell us, if the shooting is justified, why would you lock up your gun and demand the police produce a search warrant?

Of course, you could be like this sap. He had a justified shoot, then fled the scene and attempted to dispose of his gun. His attept to hide was poor. No doubt because of his actions including the flight and disposal of the gun, he was charged and tried for manslaughter. He beat that wrap but still ended up with the nifty felony conviction for unlawfully carrying a gun. The conviction might have been his only problem had he not fled and disposed of his gun, so not charged with manslaughter, and even then he might have managed a plea bargin for a lessor charge of unlawful carrying. Well maybe, maybe not, but after what he did, there wasn't any likely chance of a plea bargin. So the first trial drained him of his financial reserves. The second added to the debt and netted him a full blown felony conviction and time in jail. Ayoob wrote the story, explaining it was a righteous shoot. Maybe so, but the local cops apparently never believed it.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_179_30/ai_n15862439

Don't piss off the cops. While they may not be your friend, they don't have to be an aggressive enemy and if you piss them off, you have no chance of them being your friend.

ka50
January 7, 2006, 06:19 PM
Let me get this straight, after shooting someone you are going to leave the scene of the shooting, go some where else, hide evidence and then demand the police get a search warrent to recover the weapon. After shooting someone you want to play games?

Hope you like prison, because that where you are going. There will be a warrent issued for your arrest for leaving the scene of a crime. (Other charges pending) This will hold you in jail. Also, it will make getting search warrents easy for the police. Search warrents to seach your property and the property of almost everyone you know who could have hidden your weapon for you. You are the suspect, and the police will look no further because you ran.

Forget bail because you ran. You will stick in jail until the trial. Forget self defense because you ran like the guilty. After the trial you will spend a good part of your life in Prison. Not for a bad shooting, but for being stupid.

Actually retreating as far as possible into safe location after shooting is sometimes an appropriate action. If you have to defend yourself on the street, you better leave the scene, cuz his "boys" around the corner can come in storming with AK-47's. Later you can explain that you left the scene to avoid further confrontations.

Jeff White
January 7, 2006, 06:47 PM
ka50 said;
If you have to defend yourself on the street, you better leave the scene, cuz his "boys" around the corner can come in storming with AK-47's. Later you can explain that you left the scene to avoid further confrontations.

Unless your attackers friends are about to over run you and you're down to the last of your ammunition, you'd better stay right where you were when the shooting occurred. Do you really want the responding officers to be told that there was a shooting at such and such address, and the shooter fled in that direction? I can guarantee you that when the police do find you after that little escapade, you'll be eating gravel at gunpoint while they arrest you, and the first chance you get to tell your side of the story will be after you're under arrest for murder. And of course everyone on the street will have already told the police that your attacker, was really a good kid who came home to walk his aging mother to church on Sunday mornings and only approached you to ask if you knew what time the next bus came by. And you shot and killed him for bothering you.

You want to be right there when the police arrive. Fleeing the scene is going to make them believe you have something to hide.

Jeff

Skeptic
January 7, 2006, 06:56 PM
Any way you look at it, it's going to be a huge hassle. IMHO, cooperation is a positive move - don't want to piss off too many folks in a time like that. Give them the gun and lawyer up...

rock jock
January 7, 2006, 06:56 PM
I'm going call the rest of the THR group out on this. I think you should refuse any cooperation, especially GIVING UP YOUR GUN, dangit! That's your piece, your shootin' iron, your tool of self-defense. Good gracious, man, think ABOUT it! I advise you do what you think is best, not what the police tell you to do. I'm giving you this advice for your own legal protection and, well, to be honest.......I want to see what happens to someone stupid enough to follow it.

ka50
January 7, 2006, 07:24 PM
You want to be right there when the police arrive. Fleeing the scene is going to make them believe you have something to hide.

Jeff

That's like saying retaining a lawyer means you have something to hide.

I don't remember the real case scenario (search on tactics forum), a guy shot 4 robbers on the train and fled the scene and later turned himself in. His explanation that he feared retaliation and wanted to remove himself from a hostile situation as soon as possible was accepted as valid.

Basically it comes down to a situation. If you're in bad neighborhood (the kind where people hang out on the street all the time) and you shoot someone in self defense, you better run for cover... ESPECIALLY if you have to shoot someone other than your own race... then you definitely need to get outta there.

Jeff White
January 7, 2006, 08:05 PM
ka50 said;
I don't remember the real case scenario (search on tactics forum), a guy shot 4 robbers on the train and fled the scene and later turned himself in. His explanation that he feared retaliation and wanted to remove himself from a hostile situation as soon as possible was accepted as valid.

Are you referring to Bernhard Goetz, the infamous Subway Vigilante? I don't think that his explanation was accepted as valid. He was aquitted of attempted murder and served 8 1/2 months in prison on weapons charges. Then he was sued in civil court and was held liable for $43 million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages:

http://www.courttv.com/archive/casefiles/verdicts/goetz.html
Cabey v. Goetz (4/96)

Was Bernhard Goetz a racist or a helpless victim when he shot four teenagers on a New York City subway in December 1984?

That was the central issue in the civil lawsuit filed against Goetz by Darrell Cabey, one of the victims in the attack.

Over the years, the Goetz case was seized by advocates on opposing sides of urban issues like crime, race, gun control, and vigilante justice. Much of the national attention surrounded his 1987 criminal trial. Goetz, who did not testify during the trial, was acquitted of attempted murder charges. He was convicted on a weapons charge and served 8-1/2 months in jail.

The December 22, 1984, shooting left Cabey paralyzed and brain damaged. He sued for $25 million in compensatory damages and a similar amount in punitive damages.

Cabey's case was simple: Goetz was a racist who overreacted when he needlessly shot the four black youths. After wounding Cabey, Goetz walked up to the bleeding youth and delivered the paralyzing gunshot, announcing, "You don't look too bad, here's another."

Goetz's defense was just as simple: He fired in self-defense when approached by four muggers who tried to shake him down for $5.

During the trial, Cabey's lawyer Ron Kuby bolstered his case by using Goetz's own words against him.

Goetz did not show much remorse when he testified for the first time about the shooting.

He acknowledged he had thought about using his keys to gouge out the eyes of one of the wounded youths. And he was asked about his remark that Cabey's mother should have had an abortion, and that the shooting "could be looked on" as a public service.

"I was trying to get as many of them as I could," he also said.

After Goetz was called to the witness stand by Cabey's lawyers, he was expected to testify again when the defense presented its case. But he didn't. The defense presented only two witnesses.

Newspaper columnist Jimmy Breslin testified about an interview he had with Cabey almost a year after the shooting. Breslin said Cabey told him that three other young men on the train intended to rob Goetz because ''he looked like easy bait.''

The other witness was Dr. Bernard Yudowitz, a forensic psychiatrist, who testified about how intensely people can react if they believe their lives are in danger.

Verdict
On April 24, 1996, the jury found that Goetz acted recklessly and deliberately inflicted emotional distress on Cabey. The jury awarded Cabey $43 million in damages -- $18 million for past and future pain and suffering, and $25 million in punitive damages. But Cabey is not likely to see anywhere near that amount since Goetz has little money. In such cases it is common for the court to garnish 10 percent of the defendant's wages for 20 years.

I hardly find that an acceptable outcome to a legal self defense shooting. I have been told by a retired NYPD detective that if Goetz hadnt' fled the scene he probably would have been ok legally. I suppose if you want to make a name for yourself, get a guest host slot on the radio and run for NYC public advocate, that would be the way to do it.

Personally, I would recommend that unless you are in immediate danger, I would recommend that you remain at the scene.

Jeff

Strings
January 7, 2006, 08:09 PM
I have to agree with Jeff on this: while i might "retreat" to a somewhat more defensible position (like jut inside the doorway of a building if the shooting was out in public), I would still remain on the scene unless I had no choice but to leave (like "Tango's Crip buddies are about to overrun my own lil' Alamo"). When the cops arrive, I'll come out slowly, with the locked-open gun held by the barrel out far away from my body...

bruss01
January 8, 2006, 03:04 PM
Brusso: If you ever get into a bind, do yourself the biggest favor you could ever do for yourself and hire a competent lawyer. You sure as hell don't want to trust your instincts or current understanding of the law. ;)

Rockstar,

Before you go questioning someone's knowledge or instincts, please go to the trouble to do a small bit of research yourself. Please read the following before responding:

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=459

This illustrates all too well not only what is legal, but what is possible under perverted interpretations of what is legal. This is an example of a person who had done nothing whatsoever wrong, nor violated a single law, who had every gun he owns taken away under color of law. I submit humbly that you don't realize just how far things have gone in this bizarre state (CA) to make this travesty possible.

And FYI, if (when) a cop shows up at my door after a defensive shooting, he will find the open, unoaded gun on the floor, and myself sitting in a chair saying "thank god you're here, officer. We were afraid for our lives, we had to stop him. I will cooperate fully, just as soon as I have my lawyer present." And then I'll shut up, aside from answering obvious questions like "is this the gun?" and "does this gun belong to you?" and "is this handgun registered?" which are all provable with or without my cooperation. I won't answer loaded questions like "is this the gun you killed him with?" which attempt to assign guilt or responsibility. I will simply say "that is the gun that was involved in the shooting." If you answer that loaded question "yes" the cop simply writes down that you "admitted killing the victim". Prosecutors love it when people confess to murder, it makes trying the case so much easier. You need a witness (hopefully someone besides your lawyer) present to hear the questions and your answers. Your lawyer will have a jolly good time trying to call himself to the stand to testify on your behalf.

Fortunately, my lawyer lives next door. He's no specialist in criminal law but he'll do an admirable job standing in until I get a criminal lawyer on task.

tellner
January 8, 2006, 08:59 PM
I'm going call the rest of the THR group out on this. I think you should refuse any cooperation, especially GIVING UP YOUR GUN, dangit! That's your piece, your shootin' iron, your tool of self-defense. Good gracious, man, think ABOUT it! I advise you do what you think is best, not what the police tell you to do. I'm giving you this advice for your own legal protection and, well, to be honest.......I want to see what happens to someone stupid enough to follow it.

I knew a guy from Sweet Home, Oregon. During hunting season he and his brother would get to talking to people who shouldn't have been out in the woods.

"Don't believe what they tell you, deer can see orange. You need all camo."

"If you talk the deer will hear you. Signal with a white handkerchief."

"There's a lot of thick brush out there. Use a couple of sticks to move it out of the way when you walk. You don't want to snag your rifle."

Says they used to have them up until #3... :rolleyes:

IndianaDean
January 8, 2006, 09:24 PM
This is the reason I think only owning one gun is not enough. If I'm ever involved in a justified shooting (and I hope I'm not), I don't want to be defenseless while the investigation is ongoing.

Graystar
January 8, 2006, 11:44 PM
Bottom line is...it's not a justifiable shooting until the state says so.

Bartholomew Roberts
January 9, 2006, 02:01 AM
That's like saying retaining a lawyer means you have something to hide.

I don't remember the real case scenario (search on tactics forum), a guy shot 4 robbers on the train and fled the scene and later turned himself in. His explanation that he feared retaliation and wanted to remove himself from a hostile situation as soon as possible was accepted as valid.

Goetz was acquitted DESPITE doing something stupid. That doesn't necessarily mean the rest of us will enjoy that same kind of luck. Fleeing the scene is much more likely to cause problems than prevent problems.

Graystar
January 9, 2006, 10:53 AM
I always felt Goetz should have gone to jail for attempted murder. I believe his first shots were 100% justified. But when he walked over to the downed perp and said, "You don't look too bad, here's another", and then shot him, that's when he became an attempted murderer to me.

You shoot to stop the attack. When the attack stops, so does your right to use deadly force against the attackers.

buzz_knox
January 9, 2006, 11:30 AM
I always felt Goetz should have gone to jail for attempted murder. I believe his first shots were 100% justified. But when he walked over to the downed perp and said, "You don't look too bad, here's another", and then shot him, that's when he became an attempted murderer to me.

You shoot to stop the attack. When the attack stops, so does your right to use deadly force against the attackers.

Except the physical evidence showed that the last shot didn't occur as stated. What happened is the Goetz was an extremely troubled person who took the public statements by the police chief that the shooter was a crazed animal to heart. Goetz started seeing himself as said animal and that cold-hearted statement and action was something such an "evil" person would do.

Goetz shot to stop and stopped firing when the threat ended. As Jeff said, if he hadn't ran, he wouldn't have been in as much trouble because there would have been no apperance of flight and less opportunity for him to imagine "facts" in his own mind.

CAS700850
January 9, 2006, 11:30 AM
bruss01, I'm pretty sure rock jock was being sarcastic. Why else would he say he wanted to see someone stupid enough to follow the advice he was giving?

Rockstar
January 9, 2006, 11:33 AM
That's like saying retaining a lawyer means you have something to hide.

I don't remember the real case scenario (search on tactics forum), a guy shot 4 robbers on the train and fled the scene and later turned himself in. His explanation that he feared retaliation and wanted to remove himself from a hostile situation as soon as possible was accepted as valid.

Basically it comes down to a situation. If you're in bad neighborhood (the kind where people hang out on the street all the time) and you shoot someone in self defense, you better run for cover... ESPECIALLY if you have to shoot someone other than your own race... then you definitely need to get outta there.

(Bernie Goetz)The fact that he fled the scene also hurt him when he was prosecuted. However, if he'd been in a Real State, he'd have been awarded a medal for the shooting, but given a few demerits for accuracy. Your analogy about leaving the scene is pubescently fallacious.

If you enjoyed reading about "handing over a gun to police after a justified homicide." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!