Yes, but as long as he can specifically specify the spontaneity of his sporadic speculation... he should be just fine!
I'll give it 50/50 the DA drops all charges. Obvious the detective and possibly a actist ADA sent this to the Grand Jury with out knowledge of the higher ups.
Biggest problem I see is the victim believed the gun would solve all problems and resorted to it before trying anything else. This very easily could have went the other way and the victim could be the one in the ground.
The gun should not be the first choice, especially if you are going to close with the suspect.
Remember there is always at least one gun in a situation like this, yours. Always protect your gun from a disarm attempt.
The gun should not be the first choice, especially if you are going to close with the suspect.
Remember there is always at least one gun in a situation like this, yours. Always protect your gun from a disarm attempt.
Win or lose, the defendant will pay dearly, probably lose his business due to expense of litigation, then the wrongful death suit will be filed, star witness is boy's mother that saw the shooting but not the fight.
"I really hope he walks away clean from this though" Why are you invested in this guys future?
"Hindsight being 20/20, he probably didn't expect it to escalate to a fight when he stepped outside to confront him." He came out of the door with his gun pointed at the perp. That doesn't seem like a DE-escalation move to me.
"Unfortunately, when dealing with bad guys, they can be unpredictable - response still must be reasonable though." Bad guys? No sure about that. But a guy with mental illness is def gonna be unpredictable. Another reason to keep your distance from the perp(along with a million other reasons like tactical advantage.) He NEVER need to get close enough to the perp to "feel threatened" and have to use his gun.
He could have yelled at him from the open door that police were on there way. The perp wasn't hurting or threatening anybody. Wasn't even able to get in the car. Seems to me this was a man with a gun trying to be a cowboy without having any training on how to handle the issue.
Yeh, guy probably shouldn't have gone out there with the gun. If you think it is dangerous enough that you need a weapon then why go out there in the first place?
But despite poor tactical planning in the heat of the moment the kid in this video obviously attacked the guy and he still didn't shoot him (as he should have) Until the kid grappled with him for the gun. He defended himself at that point and a good lawyer would do his best during trial to separate the initial response and the attack into seemingly two seperate events.
HERES WHAT I THINK SHOULD BE A IMPORTANT TAKE AWAY!
(None of you see this coming)
Jury Duty!!
Everyone wants to get out of it and it's basically a running joke of how it is a waste of time. (And it probably will be a silly case)
The judge and lawyers trying the case know the law better than anyone, but average joes are mirrors to make sure bad laws aren't enforced.
To me it's quite possibly one of the most important things we can do, even next to voting.
But despite poor tactical planning in the heat of the moment the kid in this video obviously attacked the guy and he still didn't shoot him (as he should have) Until the kid grappled with him for the gun. He defended himself at that point and a good lawyer would do his best during trial to separate the initial response and the attack into seemingly two seperate events.
HERES WHAT I THINK SHOULD BE A IMPORTANT TAKE AWAY!
(None of you see this coming)
Jury Duty!!
Everyone wants to get out of it and it's basically a running joke of how it is a waste of time. (And it probably will be a silly case)
The judge and lawyers trying the case know the law better than anyone, but average joes are mirrors to make sure bad laws aren't enforced.
To me it's quite possibly one of the most important things we can do, even next to voting.
Charges should be dismissed, my opinion anyway. Showed it to my wife, an she thought the guy got control of the gun, is standing whilst the aggressor is on his back, an shoots him when he could have just started moving away. AN the kicker, if he started to move away an the guy tried to get after him again, THEN he would have been alright to shoot. I sure as hell don't want to be carried by 6, but all of a sudden I sure as **** don't want to be judged by 12.
This one is unfortunate.
The guy who did the shooting should have stood his ground.
He would have been OK if the perp came at him, but he is not OK to go and insert himself into the situation. That is not 'stand your ground.'
The guy who did the shooting should have stood his ground.
He would have been OK if the perp came at him, but he is not OK to go and insert himself into the situation. That is not 'stand your ground.'
This is one of those "could he? Yes. Should he? no." things. While the Castle Doctine does not apply, as already stated, grand theft auto is a forcible felony and at least in your state, lethal force is condoned in stopping same. So was he within the law to come out the door like he did? Yes.
Should he have just stayed inside, called 911, and waited? I would have, yes. No thing is worth dying over.
Should he have just stayed inside, called 911, and waited? I would have, yes. No thing is worth dying over.
