Self Defense or Murder a real case

[Jeff White]

No hypothetical scenario that someone made up. This is a real case that was on A&E's show The First 48 last night. This show has generated a little controversy in police circles because of how much of actual interrogation techniques it shows.

Synopsis of the case:
Police respond to a 911 call of shooting and a man down. The man is dead. Police discover that surveillance cameras at the apartment complex have taped the shooting. It appears that the victim was the aggressor and charged the shooter. A canvas of the neighbors living in the complex leads to the name of a suspect living in the same apartment complex. Suspect is located and taken into custody. Suspect claims self defense and tells his side of the story. Suspect is charged.

This is a link to the video on A&E's website:
http://link.aetv.com/services/link/bcpid1403442681/bclid13632851001/bctid13681161001

The case is in Part 1 from about 9 minutes until the end, Part 2, from the beginning to 4:17, Part 3 from 2:51 to the end and Part 4 from the beginning to 4:44.

There doesn't need to be any discussion of the fact that the suspect is a convicted felon in possession of a firearm, that is a separate issue from the shooting and not at all relevant to our discussion here.

Keep your comments focused on the self defense issues. It certainly looks like the deceased charged the suspect with intent to do harm. There is a lot to be learned here if you take the time to look at it from that angle.

 

[buckeye8]

Jeff, that link does not work for me.

 

[zxcvbob]

is this it? http://www.aetv.com/the_first_48/

OK, that's not it. What episode?

 

[Jeff White]

Fixed the link. Sorry guys.

 

[jc650]

Thats a great show isnt it? I saw that one to last night and Id bet he pleads guilty to a reduced charge of manslaughter or something similar. Would be tough to get a murder conviction based on the video.

 

[Nugilum]

Wow...
I'll need to think about this one.
Right now from what I saw on the video, I wouldn't have charged him.

But I'm not a LEO or the DA...

 

[WTBguns10kOK]

It's conspicuous the suspect knew the earlier robbery dealt with a little weed, but impossible to prove he committed it, so I don't see how they can charge him with that, and regardless, the victim can't avenge the crime. I don't see where the motive for killing the victim comes from then, without proof linking to the robbery. So all we can see is an angry man, who by photos appears larger than the suspect, charging in a threatening manner. You feel like the whole thing is dirty, but given the video evidence, I don't think the CI's testimony is enough to counteract it. Self defense.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

If I were defending Kenny, I'd want to talk to the other two men with him and get their corroboration of what the incident looked like from their side of the hill, as well as to get a clearer picture of what was said. Assuming their testimony is in line with Kenny's intervew (UGH! Kenny! Shut it!) and the videotape, I would be fairly confident in MY state (not necessarily his) with a self-defense plea. A jury would not like Kenny very much, but they'd eat up that video.

Now, Kenny has a few other problems. Felon in possession. Carrying a concealed weapon. Probably in violation of probation/parole by the illegal carry and, I'm guessing, association with felons. So he's going away, but in my state at least, probably not for murder or even manslaughter. Manslaughter, by the way, is what the local DA probably would charge him with, leaving the determination of the ultimate facts (and his guilt or innocence) to the jury.

If I were a juror, it would matter a lot that DeBarry advanced SO rapidly on the group of men, that he kept his arm raised as if he were armed, and that he spoke as if he were armed. It's puzzling behavior. It would also matter a little that Kenny appeared to back up as he shot, and that the shots were not made rapid-fire. But most of all, it would matter that DeBarry was masked. Clearly that suggests criminal intent on DeBarry's part. I'd vote to acquit Kenny of manslaughter.

 

[Nugilum]

I didn't think he had a felony record. The shooter in the first of the two cases was a felon, but I don't believe the second story (Kenny) had a record.

OK, Part 1, 8min 9sec in, it shows a picture of the ground and what appears to be a ski-mask.

Whoops, cocaine possession. My bad.

So Kenny's charged because one guy told the investigator a rumor about a robbery and revenge. I kinda question the validity of their Informant.

 

[Jeff White]

So Kenny's charged because one guy told the investigator a rumor about a robbery and revenge. I kinda question the validity of their Informant.

The informant has nothing to do with shy he's charged. The alleged robbery has nothing to do with why he's charged. The circumstances are murky enough that the police and the prosecutor don't have any idea what really went down, so they are going to let the jury ascertain the facts in the case.

Kenny's record, his being a felon in possession of a firearm, his CCW without a permit are all immaterial to if he shot in self defense.

His alleged involvement in a robbery (that no one can say for certain happened) earlier in the day, may or may not be a factor. So you take it to trial, let both sides present their case and let a jury decide. That way the prosecutor can say to the family of the dead man that he just didn't blow the whole thing off. Hopefully the whole story will come out in the trial.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Considering all the postings typically added to hypothetical, even absurdly hypothetical scenarios, I suppose I should be surprised at the dearth of commentary to this real, quite instructive and in some ways typical case. Though for some reason I'm not.

 

[sm]

Phillip (deceased) covers quite a bit of ground in a hurry,
with hand extended, and is upon Kenny(suspect), whom is standing between a occupied vehicle, and parked vehicle.

Kenny (suspect) fires 3 rounds of Win .38spl at Phillip (deceased).

--
Self Defense Stuff.

1.
Rule of Three seems to apply:
3 shots, in 3 seconds or less, from 3 yards or less.

2.
What is your safe distance?
Phillip closed distance fast on Kenny and that vehicle.
I can't get an accurate idea of distance and time.


3.
Surveillance Camera did not prevent this event from happening.

(obligatory pointing out with middle finger to Anti-Gun and Gun Control folks-stuff)

4.
"Guns-n-Ammo" stuff.
Since everyone always wants to know about the Hardware, and not Software...

Being honest, I did not pay attention to the revolver when it was shown, my attention was focused elsewhere, still it appeared to be a Charter Arms.
(not sure, don't care).
I did hear Officer ID the ammo as Win .38spl.

4.
Have a Gun.
See 1, 2, 3 4 above.

It does not have to be what TEEM SEEL is using this month either it seems...

That is all for now.
I am digesting what I have viewed and will view again.





Some good stuff there Maynard we can all learn from.- Retired HRT feller I knew.
*he was a hoot*

 

[KaintGetwright]

My take on this is that even if there was a confrontation earlier in the day, most states (as far as I know) distinguish between individual confrontations, and once the previous situation is disengaged standard rules of self defense apply.

Between the aggressive advance of the deceased and his arm being held out in what I would view as a threatening manor, it would be hard for me to convict him on any charge of violence. Any other charges are of course up for debate.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Definitely a Charter Arms revolver, based on the cylinder release tab. Looked a little bigger than a .38, and the cylinder looked like it held five rather than six rounds, so I'm guessing a .44 Special. But if not .44 Special, then .38 Special.

 

[sm]

Yes, I see the revolver was a Charter.
Charter did both a 5 shot and 6 shot .38spl .
The .44 Bull Dog is a 5 shot.

The gun and ammo is not really that important to me, nor really to the S&T as we are concerned with in this thread.
Why? Simple. The gun went bang 3 times and stopped a threat.
I am familiar with the 5 and 6 shot Charter 38 spl snub nose, and .44 Bull Dog.
Granted it has been some time, still the guns went bang, and folks carried them, or kept them in homes, offices.

Pretty Simple cut and dried case of S&T as far as the "Hardware" is concerned.

The Software aspect I and those that used those Charters, was the real important part.

That said, Kenny who we have no idea of his firearm expertise, had "Software" enough to employ "hardware.

Aw hell, what I am trying to say is, Kenny did not want to be a victim, he had a willingness to survive, had a gun, and it worked 3 times.
It was not the gun, instead Kenny having taken prudent steps to not be a victim.

I just get fed up with Master Blaster 3000s guns using exotic ammo and carried in whoop-de-doo holsters.

Kenny was in fear and the reality is Phillip would be just as dead if Kenny had used a length of Rebar, a hammer, or screwdriver.

Guns are fine and dandy, still had that driver been paying attention and the engine running , running over Phillip would have stopped that threat too.

To heck with guns, gimmee me sheet metal and horsepower.
*smile*


I am looking at other aspects of this Video with S&T in mind.

 

[JKimball]

I've often heard, or read about how important mindset is in successfully surviving a violent attack. I was impressed that Kenny did not freeze up when he saw the attack coming. He used his feet to move away from the attack and buy more time to figure out what was going on as well as to get his own gun out. And as soon as he determined this masked man meant to cause him serious harm he didn't hesitate to shoot. He didn't wait to see a gun or hear a gunshot. He made his decision and immediately acted on it. His felonious history has no doubt been a big part of helping him develop that mindset.

Do you guys think it is possible to develop that mindset without real world experience? How?

 

[Fred Fuller]

Do you guys think it is possible to develop that mindset without real world experience? How?

Yes, it most certainly is possible. How?

Get training from someone who knows what to teach and how to teach. Always look for opportunities to improve your training. The state of the art is a moving target, no one is ever completely trained. There are always new things to learn.

Practice what you learn in training until proper performance is reflexive.

Study. Analyze. Observe. Constantly... and start right here: http://www.paladin-press.com/product/772/27

http://www.teddytactical.com/archive/Feature/2008/TrainingModel.pdf

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/five_stages.html

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/interview.htm

and so on.

hth,

lpl

 

[bikerdoc]

Bottom line
Every bullet has a lawyer attached to it.
Knowing the legal requirements for a "good shoot" goes along with the mindset to shoot.