General Categories > Laws and Legislation

Gray areas in Self Defense

<< < (4/4)

bullit:
Use of "Deadly Force" is defensible when you are under the threat of "immediate and otherwise unavoidable threat of death or grave bodily harm".   Would the"reasonable and prudent" person placed in the totality of circumstances you are in make the decision to use "deadly force"?  You must be able to articulate to the jury why you did what you did....



--- Quote from: depserv on May 17, 2013, 07:56:18 AM ---Say for example someone claims to be a plain clothes police officer but you don't believe him; he insists on putting cuffs on you because he says you look like a suspect or "for your safety" or something, and he won't wait for you to call 911 and confirm that he's who he says he is (criminals tend to make things happen fast).  A lot of people aren't all that familiar with police procedure, and it's not uncommon for criminals to pretend to be police.

If the only way to stop this guy from putting cuffs on you and forcing you into his car is to draw your pistol and shoot him, are you legally justified in doing so?
--- End quote ---

Your scenario could go a number of ways.  A LEO must identify themselves to you and/or demonstrate proof of such  I don't believe outside of that anyone can give you a perfect answer.  Again, what is the reasonable prudent person going to do in the same situation.  If you "reasonably" used deadly force on a LEO who was outside of their department procedures, it would probably put you on the side of the angels....

Dan W:

--- Quote from: bullit on May 17, 2013, 09:57:56 AM ---If you "reasonably" used deadly force on a LEO who was outside of their department procedures, it would probably put you on the side of the angels....
--- End quote ---

 In Nebraska I believe it would be a crime to defend your self against the actions of a LEO, even if the action on the part of the officer was not legal

bullit:
Dan W.... yes, I would tend to agree with you.  There is no clear cut answer with regards to how the trial might come out.  You would be at the mercy of the jury, but defense would rest on totality of the circumstances as you believed them to be and ability to convey such.

AAllen:
I agree with Bullit on this, first we are dealing with a compound question.  Was the person a police officer?  Did you or should you have known that the person was a police officer?

If those can be anwered in your favor the next question would be, was the act of trying to control you an attempt to kidknap or otherwise harm you?

If all of those questions could clearly be answered where the

--- Quote from: bullit on May 17, 2013, 10:44:59 AM ---totality of the circumstances as you believed them to be and ability to convey such.

--- End quote ---
were met, then you would be justified. 

There are a lot of questions you would need to answer before going to the point of using deadly force.  That is one of the things you need to be prepared to do if/when you decide to carry for your defense.

depserv:

--- Quote from: AAllen on May 17, 2013, 12:22:45 PM ---There are a lot of questions you would need to answer before going to the point of using deadly force.  That is one of the things you need to be prepared to do if/when you decide to carry for your defense.
--- End quote ---

I agree.  That's why I started this thread: better to think about these things while we sit calmly in front of our computer than have to try to think about them when our life is on the line and we only have a short time to decide.

I'd like to thank everyone who has made a well thought out response to my hypothetical questions.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page