Interview with a survivor that used his CC to save his and his wifes life!

Very well done on the honest citizen's part. He and his wife are alive and well, and two thugs will NOT be attempting to rob and perhaps murder anyone else.

That said, if it were I, I'd never consent to do an interview such as that in which I said certain things that could easily be used against me in a Civil Lawsuit by the thugs' relatives.

Call me "paranoic," but I know how some of his statements could be turned around by a bottom feeding lawyer to help "enrich" the dead thugs' relatives' pockets.

L.W.

Interesting that the clip was preceded by a home security system ad.

Incredibly well-spoken in light of what he went through - wow - God bless him and his family.

He did a great job of coming across as a reasonable, rational citizen. Poster child for self-defense.

I don't know where this occurred (by the call letters of the station, I'd guess Louisville, KY?), but some states have protection from civil prosecution if it is deemed that it was a "good shoot", e.g., no criminal action on the part of the shooter.

Wow, boarding house rules!

His lawyer should have spoken to him about not speaking to the press, but it is a great story.

Can anyone find an example of a person involved in a "good" self defense shoot who was then successfully sued by the family of the deceased? I hear this a lot, but never come accross a lawsuit that succeeded.

Good point GLK23.

I'm pretty sure that Getz got himself in trouble because he used more force than was determined necessary to get out of the situation.

If you know the background, Getz should have first attempted to move away the moment he was asked for money, and when he did fire, he blasted all four of them within a second and a half.

While I applaud Bernie's actions, I also have to count myself among those who believe that he was looking for a situation like this to "take care of business".

That was a case that went throught the courts and he lost, but I doubt if anyone can find more than a couple more outcomes like this out of thousands and thousands and thousands where people were vindicated for their use of deadly force.

1) It was four on one, which is justification for lethal force in MY state.

2) Getz was carrying a gun in violation of NYC law.

3) He testified that his intent was to murder them. After one was no longer a threat, he walked over to him and attempted to shoot the criminal.

Goetz then saw Cabey moving on the bench and confessed to approaching Cabey and saying, "You don't look too bad, here's another," and then attempted to shoot Cabey again in the stomach, with an empty gun.

Click to expand...

Getz crossed the line between self-defense and criminal action.

Right, but aside from using an illegal weapon (for Bernie to be carrying), too much force, and attempting to murder a downed thug after he was down and no longer posed a threat, it was a good shoot, right?

Good story but that was the raw video, I would like to see how it was edited for broadcast.

I don't trust the media enough to be as honest and forthright as this gentleman was.

too much force, and attempting to murder a downed thug after he was down and no longer posed a threat

Click to expand...

I didn't think there could be too much force used on a thug. And, it would be my opinion that he was a threat if breathing.

I think this was a very good interview. This guy said almost everything as perfect as it could be.
-thought he was dead
-looked death in the eye
-feared for his life and the life of his wife
-afraid that the guy would shoot back through the door when he left

Right, but aside from using an illegal weapon (for Bernie to be carrying), too much force, and attempting to murder a downed thug after he was down and no longer posed a threat, it was a good shoot, right?

Click to expand...

I posted that with the understanding GLK 23 was asking for cases in which a person was found innocent of a shooting by a court of law, but in which he was later found civilly liable. If we want to open it up to other implements besides firearms, I could always link the OJ trials...

My heart and admiration goes out to the man.

At the risk of sounding like a wiseass, I am suprised no one has commented on the fact that he put 2 .40 s&w's into one of the bad guys (one of them a head shot) and emptied the other 9 into (or at least at) the other guy and he still made it out of the building and around the corner before he went down.

Anybody a fan of Jimmy Norton? He made a great observation on the Bernie Goetz incident, should you own the book "I Hate Your Guts."

So 40S&W works. Carry inside your own home works. Seems like this guy was prepared. He could have been clever enough to fake a heart attack.... or he could have been prepared enough to fake a heart attack. Thanks for the video, my thoughts to him and his wife, and let's all add to our toolbag from this one.

Can anyone find an example of a person involved in a "good" self defense shoot who was then successfully sued by the family of the deceased? I hear this a lot, but never come accross a lawsuit that succeeded.

Click to expand...

Grieving families sometimes don't care if they pull you down into their "hell." They just want to hurt you to get "even." Then again, other families of BGs are poor folks with nothing to lose financially and everything to gain . . . if they get lucky.

FRANKLY . . . NO ONE "wins" if they spend decades of hard earned money paying a lawyer who succeeds in getting them off in a civil suit. Well, I guess the LAWYER wins, for good ones are gonna charge you an arm and a leg either way.

I agree with other posters here, KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT. Nothing you say that won't hurt you will be used against you! You have everything to lose (financially) . . . and nothing to gain with an acquittal.

T.

I agree with other posters here, KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT. Nothing you say that won't hurt you will be used against you! You have everything to lose (financially) . . . and nothing to gain with an acquittal.

Click to expand...

Good advice, of course, and everyone should never forget that the "Right to Remain Silent" was envisioned as a way for innocent people to protect themselves, not guilty people.

Guilty people are guilty people, and any evidence is going to point to their guilt no matter whether they talk or not, but things that innocent people may say can make them "look" guilty when those things are brought up in front of a jury and get them convicted for something they didn't do.

The bottom line is, especially if you are innocent, SHUT UP, until you've had full council with your attorney.
And make sure your wife understands that very profound point as well.

It's often thought that "if you're guilty, then you have nothing to hide", and that's the trap. Don't fall for it.

It's worth it to note that NEVER say anything to the police either after a shooting without a good lawyer present. The police are often not your friend no matter how justified the shoot might have seemed to you at the time. Be respectful when they show up and you can be clear that you feared for your life and you defended yourself then SHUT UP. No details, no nothing until you get counsel. Zip those lips.