View Single Post
Old October 7, 2010, 11:57 PM   #3
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoldenState
...no-one is touching this one eh...
First, at least as I see it, it's awfully broad, and I don't think these kinds of issues lend themselves to a cookbook approach.

In general, you are justified in employing lethal force only when a reasonable and prudent person, in like circumstances and knowing what you know, would conclude that lethal force is necessary to prevent otherwise unavoidable, imminent death or grave bodily injury to an innocent. To demonstrate that there was indeed a real danger from the assailant, one must show that the assailant had (1) the Ability, i. e., the power to deliver force sufficient to cause death or grave bodily harm; (2) the Opportunity, i. e., the assailant was capable of immediately deploying such force; and (3) put an innocent in Jeopardy, i. e., the assailant was acting in such a manner that a reasonable and prudent person would conclude that he has the intent to kill or cripple. A person claiming self defense will need to be able to articulate why in the exact situation as it unfolded he concluded that lethal force was necessary based in the forgoing paradigm.

So as to each of your examples, it all depends on exactly what and how things unfolded and whether you can articulate justification for the use of lethal force, under the formulation set out above.

Note also, that Cabrillo involved a trap gun, a gun rigged to fire automatically when a trip wire was sprung. While under Penal Code 198.5, "...forcible entry into one's residence by someone not a member of the household creates the presumption that the resident held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury...", in California presumptions are rebuttable, and the presumption was effectively rebutted in Cabrillo. The resident wasn't even around when the intruder was shot by the trap gun, so the resident could not possibly have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoldenState
...I have always been told since I was very young, that if I were to ever find myself in a situation where I HAD to use deadly force, to "Shoot and Shut Up," with the only pre-lawyer statements to be of the sort "I thought s/he was going to kill me," "Ive never been so scared." While in absolutely no way wishing upon death or ill will of said perpetrator turned victim. Have you similar advice?...
This has been discussed at length here. See:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=390985

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=379063
Frank Ettin is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.02410 seconds with 8 queries