Talk or Don't Talk: The Aftermath of a Self Defense Situation

[Rifleman 173]

C'mon! Just use common sense here. If I were involved in a shooting I would, when the cops first showed up, impress upon them that I was the victim and that the bad guys attacked me first. I would tell the officers where the bad guys' weapons were so that they could immediately recover them. If you wait too long there is a chance that the weapons might "disappear." I would not give an official, videotaped or written statement until my attorney was present and with me.

[Scattergun Bob]

C'mon! Just use common sense here

The problem is that with all the hormones released into our bodies during a life threatening encounter, common sense DOES NOT abound. In general one becomes very chatty and looks for vindication of our actions from others. What you paraphrased from others is great, just do that and then remember to clam up.

Good Luck & Be Safe

[bikerbill]

Almost done with Alan Korwin's new book, "After You Shoot." His premise is that calling 9-1-1 and detailing what has happened can be used against you in court, since they tape all 9-1-1 calls and you have not invoked your right to council ... so far, I don't think I'm convinced ... his argument is to call, say there's been a shooting, I need a cop and an ambulance, identify yourself and the address, and hang up ... then call your lawyer (you DO have one on retainer, don't you?) and proceed from there ... there's a discussion involving a number of lawyers, cops, etc., and no concensus yet ... interesting concept, tho ... what do you tell 9-1-1?

[Frank Ettin]

I agree that you don't want to tell a long story on the 911 call. I'd simply say something like: "Someone's been shot. We need police and an ambulance at [ location ]. I'm [ name and brief description ] and will wait here."

[BikerRN]

Knowing, often from painful expirience, that things are often not what they seem to be and that the one on the ground that has been shot will appear as a victim to the first responders behooves me to make said first responders aware the the real victim is the one that shot the offender lying on the ground bleeding.

Biker

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by BikerRN

Knowing, often from painful expirience, that things are often not what they seem to be and that the one on the ground that has been shot will appear as a victim to the first responders behooves me to make said first responders aware the the real victim is the one that shot the offender lying on the ground bleeding

Absolutely. That's why when the first responders arrive one says, "That person attacked me......etc."

[Alaska444]

I believe that if ever faced with that situation, the less you say, the better. The man in Arizona, forget his name off the top of my head openly spoke about a shooting in the woods with a crazed man known by locals to be potentially violent. The prosecuter turned all of his statements against him. The governor eventually pardoned him. I will try to dig up the exact details, perhaps someone has heard of his case and can provide a link to it.

The physiologic reaction of such a stressful situation renders statements made soon after such an event unreliable. In my Nevada CCW class, the instructor, an experienced LEO spoke about an officer involved shooting he participated in killing the suspect who drew on him first after a long chase into a dead end ally. He did not remember the last 30 seconds of the conflict once the engagement was unavoidable and did not at all know how many rounds were fired.

I have been taught in more than one CCW class to cooperate with the police for the immediate situation and calmly if possible state I will be glad to give a full statement once I have a lawyer present. If they are going to take you jail, they will take no matter what you say based on their initial investigation.

Another statement from a LEO doing the CCW class is that LEO's are not your friends in such a situation, perhaps not your enemy either, but they have a job to do and reporting anything you say is part of that job. Don't play lawyer, cooperate but shut up and get an experienced CCW lawyer. Don't talk to anyone about the case. Seemingly innocent statements to third parties have landed more than one person in jail. The affirmative defense lays the framework for admitting you shot the person but within the grounds of legal self defense. Adverse statements at the crime scene can make such a defense impossible.

[Alaska444]

Here it is, Harold Fish. Quite frightening example of simply answering questions in aftermath of self defense shooting that landed him in prison with second degree murder conviction. Anytime I think of what to say after such an event, God forbid I am ever faced with a life threatening attack, I think of Fish. Stay quiet, calm, cooperative and ask for your lawyer who understands affirmative self defense.

http://azdailysun.com/news/local/art...470e1b916.html

[BikerRN]

I believe that if ever faced with that situation, the less you say, the better. The man in Arizona, forget his name off the top of my head openly spoke about a shooting in the woods with a crazed man known by locals to be potentially violent. The prosecuter turned all of his statements against him. The governor eventually pardoned him. I will try to dig up the exact details, perhaps someone has heard of his case and can provide a link to it.

His name was Harold Fish.

He was a retired school teacher. There is another case in AZ where the shooter didn't say anything, and that laid the groundwork for the assailant's family and friends to paint the real victim as the aggressor, instead of the way it actually was. Two hung juries later the County Attorney decided not to try him a third time. His name was Larry Hickey.

You can be hung no matter what you do. My belief however is that one should point out the relevant facts and then SHUT UP! If you do nothing you will appear guilty. If you do too much, you will be found guilty. It is a narrow line we tread.

Biker

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Alaska444

...The prosecuter turned all of his statements against him. The governor eventually pardoned him....

As BikerRN pointed out, the man's name is Harold Fish. The governor did not pardon him.

The court of appeals overturned the conviction because the trial judge erred by not admitting certain evidence offered by Fish in his defense. A new trial was ordered, but the prosecutor decided not to retry Mr. Fish and instead dismissed the charges.

[Alaska444]

As BikerRN pointed out, the man's name is Harold Fish. The governor did not pardon him.

The court of appeals overturned the conviction because the trial judge erred by not admitting certain evidence offered by Fish in his defense. A new trial was ordered, but the prosecutor decided not to retry Mr. Fish and instead dismissed the charges.

Yup, actually, I found the name in the post above BikerRN if you note. You are correct that the governor did not pardon him, but she did sign a law retroactively including Fish and removing any possibility of further criminal charges putting the burden of proof on the prosecution instead of the burden of proof on the defendant who in Fish's case must prove his innocency. Technically, not a pardon, but I was just going off the top of my head. Old age takes its toll on the brain cells.

I also looked up the Larry Hicks story and yes, he did not make a statement immediately, but he also did NOT obtain competent counsel immediately as well to make a full statement of facts with in a couple of days under the proper counsel.

http://www.shastadefense.com/ArmedCi...ork_2010-9.pdf

So I believe the proper way to deal with this is keep quiet immediately after the fact due to the physiologic effects of adrenalin and stress reaction, obtain competent representation immediately to intervene on your behalf with a lawyer that is familiar with self defense cases. Fish talked too much without a lawyer and the inconsistencies in his statements led to indictment. Hicks didn't even make a formal statement before his indictment and counted on a court provided public defense lawyer after the fact. Their cases are unfortunate, but not ideal examples of self defense cases.

From all of the reading and CCW classes I have attended, the recommendations are to limit immediate after the fact statements to nothing but the basics. Obtain competent representation immediately, make a full formal legal assisted statement within a few days of the incident once the stress reaction adrenalin is abated and aggressively defend from the beginning to establish the facts.

It always helps to have witnesses supporting your side of the story. I hope I am never in such a situation in the first place. For Larry Hicks, immediate retreat would have been the best approach if possible. In retrospect, he believes if he would have been more assertive in defending himself by pushing the woman down and retreating, the shooting might have been averted. If I have two large women beating on me, I will defend myself in kind to put an end to it without the need for further escalation of force. Another lesson to consider. One was apparently a martial arts practition, talking about the women. Better to to knock the women down before the boyfriend jumps in. Then it is three against one and you by definition have grounds for immediacy and jeopardy of life or grave bodily injury. Most of us wouldn't ordinarily hit a woman, but a solid defensive punch against two aggressive woman might have ended the confrontation allowing retreat before the boyfriend arrived.

Easy to second guess after the fact, but I believe there are lessons for all of us to consider. People do not react appropriately in an emergency situation unless they have had prior training and a lot of it. You really have to know the answer before the situation happens to know how to do right.

In any case, great discussion. Terrible situations.

[B.N.Real]

Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.

Say what better be the truth.

"I shot him in self defense."

and

"Officer,with all due respect,any other information I give you will come after my attorney is present to represent me in this matter."

[JohnKSa]

With a minimum of words, make sure the police know:

Who is the victim.
Who is the attacker.
Who are the witnesses.
Anything else that is critical to your defense that can't wait. For example, if the attacker's weapon isn't immediately obvious (e.g. he dropped it and it slid under a car or down a storm drain) you should point it out.

Then shut up and tell the police you will cooperate fully after talking to a lawyer.