July 13, 2009, 11:10 AM | #26 |
Junior Member
Join Date: July 9, 2009
Posts: 8
|
CCW Insurance
As noted above, many attorneys will consider legal expenses as insured in a righteous shooting and will defer to the insurance company for payment.
|
July 13, 2009, 11:18 AM | #27 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
|
July 13, 2009, 11:26 AM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
Quote:
Maybe. I haven't put either theory to the test. While you are correct that no one can indemnify another for a criminal act or even an intentionally wrongful act, that does not necessarily apply to advancing expenses for the costs of defense, particularly if the party being advanced the expenses agrees to repay the advance if found guilty. The insurance company quite reasonably does not want to extend credit on that basis. If you think criminal defense attorneys do, you don't know many of them. The problem with defending a "righteous shooting" is that the typical criminal defendant has a not-very-surprising tendency to omit unfavorable facts in his retelling of the events. Criminal defense attorneys tend to be skeptical of how innocent the client claims to be. My brother-in-law just retired after about 30 years of being a public defender, and he learned that it was a waste of time to tell defendants "Tell me what really happened so I can defend you better." He would start the interview with "Tell me what the police will say happened." In reality, it doesn't matter what happened. What matters is what the prosecution can prove what happened. And there is no way an attorney can figure out that it was a "righteous shooting" in a conference with a new client. He has to read the police report, talk to the prosecution and find out their evidence, talk to witnesses, and possibly even hire experts (like Mas Ayoob). Criminal defense attorneys don't want to take on a case without money up front. There's something about a criminal conviction and incarceration that saps the will of the client to pay. So go back to your insurance company and find out if the policy will advance the costs of defense. It's possible you have misunderstood the terms of the policy. If not, the policy is of little benefit in this area. |
|
July 13, 2009, 11:29 AM | #29 |
Junior Member
Join Date: July 9, 2009
Posts: 8
|
CCW Insurance
We have lead lawyers in all states, but we do not dictate the attorney to use - it's up to the insured. We will reimburse those expenses.
Misdemeanor is still a criminal conviction and coverage would not apply. Reimbursement is to the policy limit. It's better to have a couple of thousand in reimbursement than nothing at all. |
July 13, 2009, 11:34 AM | #30 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
What sort of price range are we talking about, say $50,000 coverage.
I'm not asking for "It will be $32.86 per month." I'm asking is it in the realm of $10 or $50 or $100?
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
July 13, 2009, 11:35 AM | #31 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
Quote:
|
|
July 13, 2009, 11:37 AM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
I answered my own question from the website WTHopkins posted:
$100,000 (Colorado, New Mexico ‐ $360.50, Arizona ‐ $361.22) $250,000 (Colorado, New Mexico ‐ $442.90, Arizona ‐ $443.79) These are adequate policy limits. |
July 13, 2009, 11:44 AM | #33 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
Quote:
Also, on the application: "I acknowledge that I am only eligible for this insurance because I am, and while I remain, a holder of a valid Carry Concealed Weapons permit issued by the State of _____________ . I also acknowledge that the insurance applied for herein will become null, void and no longer in effect immediately upon the expiration, suspension, cancellation, voluntary relinquishment or any other termination of the Carry Concealed Weapons permit identified above on this Application." What if the insured has their permit revoked as a consequence of the self defense action, previous to being convicted or even before trial?
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
|
July 14, 2009, 12:22 AM | #34 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: In a state of flux
Posts: 7,520
|
The tough thing here is, there really-and-truly are not a lot of options for financing a self defense case.
Have I missed anything? Personally, I think the best choice is a combination of options: get some insurance, join the ACLDN, and maybe toss prepaid legal onto the pile of paperwork if you occasionally need a lawyer for other things. Don't expect any one option to be the start & finish of what you'll need. Don't judge the insurance options too harshly, as there simply aren't any truly comprehensive policies out there for CCW holders. All of the above was simply to say this: coverage limitations are a practical reality to consider, nothing more or else. They don't have to be a deal-killer, and in fact they should not be. This is a classic case of the perfect (which is non-existent) being an enemy of the good (a decent option for some, available now). pax Last edited by pax; July 14, 2009 at 12:28 AM. |
July 14, 2009, 01:14 AM | #35 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
PDs and prosecutors have similar work-loads. Why is it that people are always bad-mouthing PDs for wanting to settle but no one says that about prosecutors? I find it odd. As for experience, as I mentioned in another post, my brother-in-law recently retired after more than 30 years as a PD. He tried all sorts of jury trials. He was familiar with the juries and judges in his county. When he had a trial pending, he worked nights and weekends. His clients got represented by an experienced and smart lawyer (with an Ivy League education), one much better than a private lawyer who only occasionally tried a criminal case. But, as noted, not everyone qualifies, and if one doesn't qualify for a PD and doesn't have big bucks to spend on his defense, then he may have to make do with a crappy private attorney. I know of one top private attorney who does criminal work whose rate is $650 an hour. You'd be up in the six figures pretty quick with a serious criminal case if you hired him. Quote:
Being in CA, I don't have, and would be unlikely to be able to obtain, a CCW. So this is pretty theoretical for me. If I did have a CCW, I would rather spend the money on an umbrella policy that would cover me for negligence and provide more protection against civil liability. I think the risk of some kind of civil liability would greatly outweigh the risks that I would be charged with a crime. |
|||||
July 14, 2009, 07:09 AM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2009
Location: Mich
Posts: 179
|
CCW Insurance? Just what I don't need. **** more of my money away on useless insurance. What next? LOL
|
July 15, 2009, 09:31 AM | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 16, 1999
Posts: 244
|
PAX:
We have just added a new benefit for members of the Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network, that being an instant $5,000 fee deposit paid to the attorney of the member's choice, right after a self-defense incident, in order for the member to afford to hire an attorney to represent him/her with interaction with police, prosecutor and grand jury, (if there is one). That is above and beyond the legal defense grant the Legal Defense Foundation will consider. Look for it to appear on our web site any day now. Marty
__________________
Marty Hayes, President The Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network, LLC. www.armedcitizensnetwork.org |
July 15, 2009, 10:10 AM | #38 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
I was just asking questions to better understand the policy.... the fact that the insurer has stopped answering legitimate questions doesn't factor well with the credibility of the policy or company.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
July 31, 2009, 02:09 PM | #39 |
Junior Member
Join Date: July 9, 2009
Posts: 8
|
Peetzakiller:
Those are annual premiums. Coverage would apply if your license is held at the time of the actionable offense. Anything that happened after that would not affect our coverage. |
|
|