Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rodfac
....thoughts on civil liability after a judgement of no criminal violation in a SD shooting. Thx in advance, Rod....
|
A jury verdict of "not guilty" in a criminal trial is not an affirmative finding that the defendant did not commit the crime. It merely means that the prosecutor did not convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did commit the crime.
The burden of proof in a civil case is "a preponderance of the evidence" and thus a lower hurdle than "beyond a reasonable doubt." So the actor might be found not guilty at his criminal trial but civilly liable on a tort claim arising from the same incident.
In States in which there is a civil immunity law for bona fide self defense, an acquittal at the criminal trial won't necessarily establish that the defendant is entitle to civil immunity. That area of the law is evolving.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by labnoti
....If it is truly a clean shoot, you may not even be charged with anything....
|
A variation on the "a good shoot is a good shoot" fallacy.
Again, you won't have the final say on whether it was a "clean shoot." That decision will be made by th DA and/or a grand jury and/or the jury at your trial. And you don't get to order your critical incident "made to measure." You will be stuck after the fact with whatever happened and however it happened. Whether or not it was a "clean shoot" will remain to be seen.