Stuff about self defense that internet lawyers wont tell you

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tell them you were afraid for your life. Tell them you will cooperate but you're scared and you want a lawyer.

There is absolutely no way they can prosecute you for exercising those right.

THEY'RE the folks who are actually going to tell you that you don't have to talk and that you can have a lawyer present--how can they turn around and say that you're guilty because you did what they advised???

The guy's jam (in your story) had to do with the circumstances of the attack and the fact that there was a "witness" against him. You imply but don't say straight out that he was finally cleared. That's really all you can hope for.

Keep your mouth shut at the scene except to say that you feared for your life. Anything you say can and WILL be used against you. Keep your mouth shut until you have a lawyer present. These are your rights and you should think about it a LONG time before you throw them away.
 
Twice now I have been told by cops(state and local) A) If you shoot him make sure he's inside when I get here...even if ya have to drag him in, and B) Make sure he's dead, makes my job and your life a lot easier.

I think I'll pass on the first bit of wisdom but I tend to agree with the second.
 
2nd Amendment,

Move the body (aka alter the crime scene) you make yourself look like you are covering up a crime, and altering the evidence is itself a crime.

If deliver a "coup de gras" to a person who is no longer a threat. You are committing a crime - murder.

Good criminal investigators, with the help of the forensic pathologist, and the technicians at the crime lab, will give evidence of those acts to the prosecutor, and it won't play well for you in court.

Assuming your story is true, then those cops were suggesting you make a difficult situation worse, by actually committing crimes, after the fact. They would be described by me, as idiots, and if you follow their advice you will most likely spend a long time in jail.
 
Man - where do you live?

If it ever worked that way, it doesn't any more. Anyone who shoots at, shoots, or kills someone outside the home (or in it in some circumstances) can expect to be arrested, have to make bond to get out of jail, and more than likely be brought to trial. Even if criminal charges are not pressed or the shooter is found innocent, he can well face a civil suit for any injury or death he has caused.
Click to expand...

I keep reading statements like the above over and over and over from various THR'rs.

I suppose it depends on where you live whether or not the claim is true because it sure isn't true in Oklahoma City. In some cases you may be arrested, your gun will be confiscated for sure and if you lawyer up there's a very real possibility that you'll spend the night in jail and may have to post a bond.

But I keep up with the local news here pretty well. I cannot recall a single case where the media reported a shooting as self defense and the law and the DA agreed where the DA chose to prosecute which means you get your guns and bond back.

NOT ONE! And I've lived in OKC since 1985. There may be some but if so I'm not aware of any. Note the key to no formal charges or an indictment being made is that both the DA and Law Enforcement agree that the shooting was indeed self defense. To the best of my recollection it doesn't take long either. The last self defense shooting I remember happened late summer or fall of last year. It took the DA about a week to determine no charges.

As for civil suit being brought - in OK the Make My Day law makes it impossible for a suit to be brought against any shooter that kills an intruder in his/her home if it was indeed a good shoot. This doesn't apply to a shooting outside the home but having lived here for 19 years I'm of the opinion that any jury made up of your average Oklahoman would laugh a plaintiff right out of court if they sued a shooter who shot in self defense and was never charged with a crime as a result of the shooting.

If it were me and I was sued by a scumbag's family I'd countersue for the emotional distress caused by having to shoot the a'hole and blame the family for him being an a'hole. I'd also countersue to recover attorney fees. I don't see why folks that live in states where this kind of thing happen don't countersue - I guess in California or the Peoples Socialist Paradise of Massachusetts it would be politicaly incorrect and insensitive to sue the family of one's attacker.
 
But I keep up with the local news here pretty well. I cannot recall a single case where the media reported a shooting as self defense and the law and the DA agreed where the DA chose to prosecute which means you get your guns and bond back.
Click to expand...

You are going on the assumption that the media actually reports these cases as self defense. They could easily just report them as a shooting and the suspect is being held in custody.

The media only reports whats sensational.
 
Didn't that Goetz guy turn himself in? Were they on to him when he did? If not, that's just dumb.
 
Ummm....I hope this is not a stupid sounding remarke, but what if the attacker pushed open your door and had a weapon and in turn you step back and fire. Now technicaly he or she was a foot inside the premises but when you shot said attacker they fall backwards and land outside of the doorway or even roll down the front steps....then what? Also I have heard stories about a person protecting themselves and the shot was not instant death but rather the attacker flees and falls dead in the driveway or the front lawn......again then what? These are just some topics that I have not seen been brought up in this thread and I would be interested in other peoples comments.
 
Ummm....I hope this is not a stupid sounding remarke
Click to expand...
Not stupid questions at all...

Those very questions came up in the CCW class I took and which was taught by a RKBA/Criminal Defense attorney. According to him (OK) your scenario meets the requirements of the law for a good shoot. The kicked in or forced door is unlawful entry. The fact that the intruder falls back onto the porch but lives long enough to get away is irrelevant. He even gave two examples of actual cases in OK where intruders tried coming into a home through the windows, were shot and fell backwards into the yard. In both cases no charges were filed and the homeowners didn't even have to take a trip to the police station.

The attorney went on to explain that dragging the miscreant into your home would assure that you became a resident of a local prison facility as the police and forensic experts are very good at what they do. They'd know you drug the intruder into your home and that would put a very, very bad spin on the whole situation - and not a spin in your favor.

The police may not be our friend but they are generally not stupid nor are they out to get us. The DA is definitely not stupid and to the best of my knowledge OK DA's will not charge a person in a self defense shooting. There may be a DA somewhere in OK that is anti-gun with an agenda who would but I wouldn't bet even a dollar on it.
 
crewcheif, modern forensic science is very good at helping reconstruct the crime. The evidence will show the majority of what occurred, and where. Which is why altering the crime scene would screw someone in an otherwise justified shoot.
 
Good Thread

Many good points and counterpoints on this one, as always whenever the issue is discussed. Unless I missed it though, Jim Keenan is the only one involved who brought up a very important issue...and it bears consideration.

Even if you are justified in pulling the trigger in every conceivable way...
Legally and morally...Even if the deceased has a record as long as his leg...even if it's for a predisposition to violence...Your choice of ammuntion
or the alteration, modification, or disabling of a designed-in safety device
probably won't have any bearing on whether the shoot was clean or not.
If lethal force is justified, what you accomplish that end with is irrelevant.
Agreed! Couldn't agree more...Clean is clean if you shot him with a 3.5-inch rocket launcher.

HOWEVER........In the CIVIL action that will probably follow your aquittal,
the fact that you used handloaded ammunition...or even factory hollowpoint
ammo that has a name like: Talon or Hydra-Shok, or anything that suggests lethality...OR...if you have modified or disabled a safety device
on the gun.(No matter that it has nothing to do with the gun firing when the trigger is pulled)...you can bet heavily that it will come up in the course of the trial. The Civil lawyer's job...what he was hired for...is to take your money and give it to his client after taking his cut. In that light...ANY-thing
that he can use to convince a jury that you were wantonly reckless, or
of evil/lethal intent, he WILL use. It's his JOB.

By the time the cretin's string of character witnesses and tearful mother and Auntie Rose get through telling what a wonderful person he was,
even you may begin to believe that you weren't justified in shooting him.

A little thing like a handloaded round that produces 30 FPS more velocity can be painted to look like it would blow holes in somebody the size of
a basketball...to a jury...the average member of which learned what he or
she knows about guns from watching TV or movies that show grown men
flying over the tops of cars after being hit with a pistol round. They'll buy the hype, unless you get lucky enough to draw a juror or two who actually knows that it's BS...and can get it across to the others.

Choose wisely...

Tuner
 
Tuner, I agree with you. The problem will be with the civil case, not the criminal case.

I have been involved in enough civil cases (unrelated to shootings, these were medical cases where I was expert witness), to know that the plaintiff's attorney is going to do anything he can to make the defendent look bad.

As one example, in a medical malpractice case, the plaintiff's attorney asked the defending physician if he was a member of the country club and what kind of car he drove. Neither of course have any bearing on the case, but make him look different to the jury.
 
Civil Actions

Lone Gunman said:

The problem will be with the civil case, not the criminal case.

Yep...You can come out of a shoot with a no-bill from the grand jury, and still wind up forking over 2/3rds of your assets and income for the rest of your life. Not pretty. Don't hand the civil litigator more ammunition by
handloading your carry ammo or removing the Series 80 firing pin safety system from your Colt. It could turn on you rather abruptly.

Life ain't like a box of chocolates...it's more like a jar of Jalapenos.
"What you do today could burn your ol' skinny tomorrow."

Cheers!

Tuner
 
Say what you will about Mas Ayoob and his writings about guns and/or tactics, but he references actual cases when discussing legal matters, and he is one of the most "in demand" expert witnesses in the field.
 
One member pointed out to me that there are people on this thread who are attourneys. My comment was not intended to offend, and if it did, I apologize.
 
And shoot for the chest, not the head.
Click to expand...

Uhh, why?

1) 1 or 2 to the head may look less bad than half a mag in the chest

2) Headshots end the fight quicker

3) Headshots tend to, in other people's words, "ensure that only one story gets told"

I remember that guy on glocktalk that got prosecuted because his headshots showed too much aggression or some crap like that, but that was because he was doing triples, 2 in the chest, then 1 in the head.
 
plus or minus 7 feet?

duke mentions in the original thread some 7 ft rule? I thought it was 21ft?
isn't there some tueller study?...............

Oh,ok ...I did the google search for ya! this is from fighting arts.com There is a saying “Don’t bring a gun to a knife fight.†Here is the reason. The Tueller Drill (named for Sgt. Dennis Tueller of the Salt Lake City Police) demonstrated that the concept of draw and fire on a target at 7 yards (6.5m or 21ft) was not decisive, but resulted in a tie when the aggressor charged the shooter. An average time of 1.5 seconds was calculated for an aggressor to cover a distance of 21 (6.4m) feet.
 
I dont understand what the Teuller Drill has to do with a GSR test.

I stated that the GSR is accurate + or - 7 feet. What's not to understand from that? How the hell does a Teuller Drill work its way into that statement?

Thats like saying - well, my car gets 21 miles to the gallon and rebutting - Well, honda made a car that gets 1 HP per CID.
 
I read a lengthy article about a guy who did just that. He ended up being prosecuted and spending a long time in jail while it was all worked out.
Click to expand...

How do you know he wouldn't have been prosecuted if he talked? The point of lawyering up is to not say anything when you are stressed/excited that could be later used to point out some inconsistency in your account and show you to be dishonest.

The police don't know exactly what happened and are not necessarily there to help you or make you feel better. IMHO, you are better off waiting until you calm down and are thinking straight.
 
LastBoyScout,

Shoot for the chest because it is easier to hit.

All posturing aside, I know we all pray that we never have to go through this. I have already decided that no matter how shook up I am or how much I need to make people understand that I had no choice but to shoot, I will not talk until I speak to an attorney.

The instructor in my CHL class said that even a justifiable shooting will cost a minimum of $20,000. I think it will be higher than that.

DM
 
If I understand Werewolf correctly, if I shoot someone in OK I just tell the cops it was self defense and they pat me on the back, cart off the body, and I walk away whistling. Somehow, I doubt that it works quite like that in any state today. I can't envision a police officer, confronted with a shooting, making his own decision to let the shooter walk away. Street cops don't think like that. The shooter will be arrested for murder and the suits will make the decision to prosecute or not. Meanwhile, it is likely there will be a bail hearing and the shooter either puts up a non-refundable 10% to make bail or enjoys the county or city hotel for a while.

I keep reading this stuff, but most of those posting seem to be recounting stories from the press or other sources, not from personal experience or personal knowledge. I would like to hear from an OK LEO that they really are that understanding and lenient about shootings that look like self defense.

As to the "shoot him and drag him inside" that is stupid advice, no matter who gives it, and any cop who would say that shouldn't be allowed to have a badge or a gun; he is plain crazy. "Drag him inside and shoot him again" is even worse, as a gentleman from near here will testify. He did just that, and is now serving a life sentence for first degree murder. Maybe what he did would be OK in OK, but it wasn't in MD.

Jim
 
Clean Shoot?

I heard a quote once...Don't remember who said it.

"Shoot...Don't shoot. Either way, you'll regret it."

Avoidance through awareness is your best defense. The gun
is there as a backup for when you screw up and find yourself
suddenly UTYAIA. Consider it as a last ditch.

Cheers all!

Tuner
 
Jim Keenan wroye: "If I understand Werewolf correctly, if I shoot someone in OK I just tell the cops it was self defense and they pat me on the back, cart off the body, and I walk away whistling. Somehow, I doubt that it works quite like that in any state today. ....The shooter will be arrested for murder and the suits will make the decision to prosecute or not. Meanwhile, it is likely there will be a bail hearing and the shooter either puts up a non-refundable 10% to make bail or enjoys the county or city hotel for a while.

I would like for Mr. Keenan to tell us where he lives - so I can be sure to never visit there.

I can ASSURE you that in Louisiana, if you shoot an intruder in your home or shoot an assailant who forces entry into your vehicle while you are in it, you will indeed get a "Pat On The Back." And you will NOT be arrested. And you will NOT have to post bail.

I'm also betting that OK and LA are NOT the only states where Mr. Keenan's statements are erroneous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Locating a concealed carry defense lawyer!
Replies
18
Views
1K
ants
A
S
  • Locked
Stock Guns ONLY for Self Defense?
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
blades67
B
B
  • Locked
Self Defense Heroes (Ladies Wanted!)
Replies
2
Views
645
Bubbles
B
I
  • Locked
Liability of self defense shooting
2 3
Replies
72
Views
5K
Kleanbore
K
T
  • Locked
Need some quick help: Need detailed newspaper self defense stories
Replies
9
Views
926
Old Fuff
O
Back
Top