Quote:
|
Depending on what the attorney thinks is best, the shooter could confess and claim self defense or not say anything and make the state prove its case.
|
No, that is not correct and this is what everyone has been trying to tell you.
If you don't report then your claim of self-defense when/if caught is very unlikely to succeed. So the first option you list isn't really an option at all. Your attorney (if you get a decent one) won't think that is best unless it's clear that they have enough evidence to convict you of murder and your only chance is a "hail mary" plea of self-defense.
So what it amounts to is that by not reporting you are hoping that:
1. You won't get caught.
2. If you do get caught (which is likely based on homicide statistics) there won't be enough evidence to convict you of murder. This is not a good bet because if they caught you they did so on the basis of evidence tying you to the homicide.
3. If you do get caught and there is enough evidence to convict you of murder that your jury will be understanding enough to let you off even though you acted like a criminal by fleeing the scene of the crime and forcing the law to track you down like a criminal. AND you have to hope that some evidence that supports your claim of self-defense is available even though the scene likely wasn't preserved immediately given that no-one reported the crime in a timely fashion.
Reporting the crime yourself is probably one of the best ways you can insure that things turn out well for you.
Besides, the first step in this whole discussion has been sort of glossed over. The first step is to verify that it's legal NOT to report. That should have been done first before getting into the hypothetical that followed.
Here's what everyone is forgetting in all this. If you shot the person legally then
the person you shot had to have been committing a felony in order to provide you with justification for using deadly force. Failing to report the attacker's felony is a crime in and of itself.