View Single Post
Old July 8, 2009, 11:33 AM   #109
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tennessee Gentleman
...As someone who is one of the minority non-gun nut/mall ninja/2A absolutist/self defense is what I think it is, poster I feel I need to tell you that if you shoot an unarmed man and are tried for that you had better be able to prove that what you did was reasonable. I know about the innocent until proven guilty deal but in the real world of non-TFLers (who you WILL be tried by) if you cannot do such you will be taking a long vacation at government expense....
While I think that if Fish now presents his case at a trial without the errors in law and procedure of the first one, he has a good chance of making his self defense case, I completely agree with your statement as a general proposition.

The "innocent until proven guilty" business is effective out the door when one pleads self defense. The prosecutor doesn't have to prove you were there, and he doesn't have to prove you pulled the trigger, and he doesn't have to prove you shot the other guy. If you plead self defense, you will have admitted all of that. You will have admitted all of the material elements of the crime for which you are being tried.

Your defense is legal justification for your act of violence against another human. To acquit you, the jury (of non-gun folks) is going to have to believe that you had no choice and that you were justified in shooting another person. That is going to be a "tough sell" when the other person was unarmed.
Frank Ettin is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.02410 seconds with 8 queries