|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 9, 2010, 11:43 PM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 15, 2004
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 715
|
managing the aftermath of a shooting incident
Here's another discussion on the topic, from a few years ago:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=218595 You have to think about this ahead of time. It's best for you to respond exactly as the police are trained: tell them briefly what happened, identify any witnesses, identify any evidence, and then tell them you need to talk to an attorney. Best to only tell these things to the police ONCE. Of course, every situation is different and every situation is dynamic. Which is why it's a good idea to research these issues and formulate a plan ahead of time.
__________________
You can only learn from experience if you pay attention! |
November 10, 2010, 12:48 PM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 22, 2010
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 988
|
At the very least, saying only the right things and in the right way makes your lawyer's job a lot easier.
If you say the wrong things, say too much, say it in the wrong way, it means he's going to have a tougher job with your case and it's going to cost you a lot more. I know, it's bad to reduce it to a money issue but take every advantage you can. The most critical point above is, as a responsible gun owner, you owe it to yourself and your family to prepare ahead of time how you're going to deal with the situation. You will NOT have time between the shooting and the time the cops arrive to figure it out. Great thread. --Wag--
__________________
"Great genius will always encounter fierce opposition from mediocre minds." --Albert Einstein. |
November 10, 2010, 12:53 PM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: In a state of flux
Posts: 7,520
|
Quote:
Here's one excellent resource, titled What Every Gun Owner Needs to Know About Self Defense Law: Link. It's written by Marty Hayes, founder of the Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network. Here's another resource: www.useofforce.us . This well written website gives a very nice overview of the important legal issues surrounding the use of force. pax |
|
November 10, 2010, 01:42 PM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Location: Californication
Posts: 264
|
You"re under no obligation to tell the police squat....Other than "I want to call my lawyer.But before that ask to be taken to the hospital to be seen by a doctor,Which will give you time to contact your lawyer.
You dont give any information to the police....Remember,"Anything you say can and "Will" be used against you.You say "Nothing".
__________________
Stupidity Should Hurt.....Immensely NRA Life member |
November 10, 2010, 02:25 PM | #30 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
The two sides of this are: (1) keep your piehole shut; and (2) cooperate and give the police at least enough information to get the investigation rolling in the right direction. There's merit to both. One of the smartest lawyers I have ever known used to say "no matter how thin you pour a pancake, it still has two sides."
If you're even reading this thread, you're on the right track. I say that because if you're reading it, you're at least thinking about what you should do if you're involved in a shooting. Whether you think it best to exercise that Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination or to cooperate (at least to the extent necessary to nudge the investigation in the right direction), you need to have a plan in place before you're involved in a shooting. You need to stick to that plan. What you do not want is to be weighing the legal factors, and trying to calculate the odds of your success at trial, at 11:30 p.m., in a parking lot, with a dead man on the pavement and a gun in your hand. |
November 10, 2010, 03:00 PM | #31 | ||
Staff
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
|
Quote:
I presume from your statement that you have not taken the time to read the above posts explaining why, but perhaps you have and are insufficiently knowledgeable about how the criminal court system works to have grasped the meaning. I'll try to explain it very succinctly: In a traditional murder case, the state will attempt to identify a suspect, and it it then up to the state to try to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the suspect did the deed. The evidence and testimony that they use will be brought to bear to bring about that result. The defendant need produce no evidence at all. The defendant does not want to assist the state by talking to them and giving them information from which they can pick and choose to complete their picture of what happened.Without said evidence, he won't even get a favorable jury instruction. Do you think that the police arriving at the scene will routinely start off by making sure that they miss no evidence that might be favorable to the shooter, if no one says anything about self defense at the outset? If so, think again. They do not encounter that many justifiable shootings. Such evidence, including favorable witness testimony, may not be retrievable if the police who control the scene to not gather it at the time. If it is not, the result will be devastating for the shooter. That is the reason for Massad Ayoob's advice on the subject. He recommends Quote:
I suggest that you read pages nine and ten of the summary written by Marty Hayes, the link to which pax has provided above. For more on what is meant by "each of the elements of justification" see the other link provided by pax. I hope you find this helpful. |
||
November 10, 2010, 03:17 PM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Location: Californication
Posts: 264
|
Everything on this forum is helpful in one way or the other.However,in my last ccw class we were treated to a lawyer,whom defends people such as ourselves and were given what we should do in such a case.California is a different animal.And god willing i will never have to be in a situation,but if it so happens i will adhear to what the lawyer said.
But thank you for your advice.
__________________
Stupidity Should Hurt.....Immensely NRA Life member |
November 10, 2010, 03:40 PM | #33 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: In a state of flux
Posts: 7,520
|
One more link. This is to a lengthy but fascinating story of a man who did just exactly as javabum suggests. He said nothing to responding officers.
Link Of course, this man was in pro-gun Arizona, so things went more easily for him than they might have if he'd been in anti-gun California. pax |
November 10, 2010, 04:50 PM | #34 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,150
|
Quote:
Some of the more street wise criminals (and some of the worst) are very much aware of that fact. Co-operating as a witness is another matter----if you're sure you're a witness. Question for those who might know a little law: What would happen if a person were being questioned before being read their rights, and felt they wanted counsil. Could they say they couldn't afford one and ask the system to furnish one. If they did that, would that force the police to either arrest them (and provide counsil) or let them go without questioning? |
|
November 10, 2010, 06:17 PM | #35 | |||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If you are pleading self defense, the core evidence for your case will be your testimony. You will absolutely need the police, DA, maybe the grand jury, and if you're unlucky, a trial jury to believe your story about what happened, what you perceived and why you concluded that you had to use lethal force. But if it comes out that you cooked up some nonsense about needing to see a doctor to buy some time, they might have a much tougher time believing you about anything. Playing games or being cute isn't going to help you. It's going to hurt you. See Massad Ayoob'd column in the August, 2010, Combat Handguns. Last edited by Frank Ettin; November 10, 2010 at 10:00 PM. |
|||
November 10, 2010, 07:49 PM | #36 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 16, 2004
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 5,333
|
Quote:
There is a reason, when cops get into a shooting, they don't interview them right away.
__________________
I don't carry a gun to go looking for trouble, I carry a gun in case trouble finds me. |
|
November 10, 2010, 08:39 PM | #37 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: In a state of flux
Posts: 7,520
|
Quote:
See http://www.laaw.com/highstress.htm The link above is to an article written for Law Enforcement supervisors, explaining what they should and should not tell their officers to do in the moments after a shooting. Very interesting stuff! One of the things that struck my eye was this: Quote:
Quote:
Kind of interesting that the advice cops give to each other for what to do after a shooting so closely parallels what we're hearing innocent armed citizens should do after a shooting: point out a few specific things, then shut up. You'd almost think some of the people posting in this thread had really studied this topic ...! Go read the article. It's really good. pax |
|||
November 10, 2010, 09:16 PM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 9, 2009
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,560
|
First off... When police get into a shooting they do make a statement right away. They may not do a lengthy interview, but they do make a statement.
This is a bit of a re-hash of other threads. But it's such an important subject there cant be too much discussion. As some have stated "SELF DEFENSE" is an affermative defense. The burden of proof is on actor. Not only will you be dealing with black letter law, you will be dealing the police and their personalities, the district atty. and his personality and politics. As long as you have professional police on the scene your ahead of the game. The police will figure out what happened. The forensics iinvestigation will usually prove your case. The police, and forensics will need a point to start the investigation. I personally believe it's foolish to not be involved at this juncture. This is the time for a simple statement. Not some rehersed scenario statement. Not a demand to speak to a lawyer. Not a request to go to the hospital (unless of course your really ill). But a simple statement. Not answer a bunch of intricate questions. I know that most people would advise you to say nothing. Thats fine... But you can usually expect the police, and states atty to interpet this as uncooperation or even guilt. It's hard personally, and politically for the police, or states atty.to back down, or change their minds and the direction of the investigation. In the beginning you have the oppertunity to contribute to the direction the investigation will take. Lawyers, and professionals such as Mr Ayoob base their opinions on cases they have been involved. I know in my heart that Mr Ayoob is a good man and has the best interest of most of us at heart. He is a good man. The cases we all hear about and take direction from are limited to those that didnt go well for the citizen defending himself. I believe that the great majority of self defense shootings go in favor of the armed citizen. We just never hear about them, just as we only hear about the negative aspects of gun ownership and only hear about those who abuse it. The only advice I stress to anyone is to never lie. Never embelish, and never ever make cocky macho statements. |
November 11, 2010, 03:53 AM | #39 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 6, 2010
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Posts: 219
|
Depends....The burden of proof is different state to state...meaning that some states require the prosecutor to prove that you were not in fear for your life...other states require you to prove that you were in fear for your life...
|
November 11, 2010, 10:45 AM | #40 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
[1] Nowhere is the standard for justification, "I was in fear for my life." That would be a subjective standard, i. e., what you, yourself, personally felt. Everywhere the standard is an objective standard, i. e., that a reasonable and prudent person in the same situation would have concluded that lethal force was necessary to prevent otherwise unavoidable, immediate death or grave bodily injury to an innocent. (In some States this standard can be a little different in some situations because of a Castle Doctrine law, or something similar; but is will always be an objective standard standard -- what a reasonable and prudent person would have believed.) [2] In every State, it will be the defendant's burden (1) to plead self defense; and (2) to at least put on evidence establishing prima facie that his conduct satisfied the applicable legal standard for the justified use of lethal force in self defense. A prima facie case in this context is evidence from which the trier of fact could infer that every element of the defense of "self defense" has been met. But the prosecutor does not have to deal with the question of self defense unless and until the defendant has brought it up and presented evidence to establish self defense. [3] What varies among States is the nature of the prosecutor's burden once the defendant has raised the claim of self defense and put on evidence establishing that claim. In some States, the prosecutor must overcome the defendant's claim of self defense "beyond a reasonable doubt." [4] But even in a State in which the defendant only has to make a prima facie case of self defense, and in which the prosecutor must rebut that claim beyond a reasonable doubt, the less convincing the defendant's case is, the easier it will be for the prosecutor to overcome it. |
|
November 11, 2010, 11:02 AM | #41 |
Member
Join Date: November 4, 2010
Posts: 29
|
Lots of conflicting advice here, and as a retired attorney with more than thirty years of practice I can state that there's a good reason for the conflicting answers. Sometimes speaking to the first LEOs on the scene will help. Often it will hurt. I, and every lawyer, will tell our clients to shut up, because we don't know whether or not they will say the right thing or the wrong thing. We err on the side of caution.
If you choose to speak, speak the truth. A lie will cook your goose. And don't guess. A wrong guess will be considered a lie. Second, the first words out of your mouth, to 911 and to the first responders, will be "[I've been/I'm being] attacked. They [are/were] going to kill me," or words to that effect. Third, if you are taken to the station, tell the LEOs that you will be happy to cooperate but demand your attorney. Say NOTHING further until your attorney arrives. Demand doesn't mean bang the table. It simply means an unequivocal statement that you want your attorney present before you are asked any questions. Ayoob's recommendations remain the closest thing to the golden rules. Even sticking to Ayoob's recommendations won't establish the defense of justification, though. That's a whole different kettle of fish. |
November 11, 2010, 12:12 PM | #42 | ||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
November 11, 2010, 02:25 PM | #43 |
Junior member
Join Date: December 3, 2009
Location: SE Alabama
Posts: 701
|
IMHO, Dont say a thing. Anything can and will be used against you in the Court of Law. Oh I would request an extra amublance you will be in shock.
|
November 11, 2010, 02:50 PM | #44 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
|
|
November 11, 2010, 03:57 PM | #45 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 10, 2009
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 185
|
+1 to Mas Ayoob's rules.
Also some more info about police shootings. I think if it's good for police, it's probably good for the armed citizen involved in a legitimate self defense shooting. Force Science #42: How to assure fair, neutral, and fact finding investigations of officer-involved shootings. Quote:
__________________
"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." -Will Rogers |
|
November 11, 2010, 04:55 PM | #46 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,150
|
Quote:
|
|
November 15, 2010, 03:17 PM | #47 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 12, 2010
Posts: 227
|
Probably also a good idea to put away your firearm. You don't want the police showing up and you waving around your full house IPSC pistol. Pop the clip out and put it in a dresser drawer. I'm not speaking from experience, but that would seem prudent.
What about the empty cases? Pick them up or leave them where they fell? - Ruark |
November 15, 2010, 03:22 PM | #48 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Put it down near you, within easy reach (the assailant might have friends or colleagues who might show up before the police get there), but keep your hands off it. |
|
November 16, 2010, 06:59 PM | #49 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 14, 2010
Location: Placerville, Ca
Posts: 589
|
Enough cooperative base information to give those on the scene a clear picture, let the scene do the details talking. References to being a bit rattled and unsure once the basics are covered is okay, it would be hard to hold you accountable for a later inconsistency if you respond with replies to being unsure and shook up.
In most situations facts will be on your side which helps tremendously.
__________________
Fiction is harder to write than the truth, fiction has to make sense, the truth can be unbelievable. |
November 21, 2010, 03:23 PM | #50 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2010
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 180
|
I have really enjoyed reading this thread through, even the posts that may not seem as well informed, as they have led to some very good information being posted. If anyone reads this thread and hasn't sat down to make sure he/she has a plan in the awful case that they will need one, then something is wrong.
And thanks to all for the links to great reference info on this subject too! Very informative. Great discussion!
__________________
Mike As much as I believe that there is good in every person, I'm not so naive as to think that all people are essentially good. Evil and evil people exist. Deny that fact at your own risk. |
|
|