Is defending yourself really that bad?

[canadyjd]

When you use deadly force, you use it until the threat is neutralized.

And when the attorney for the family suing you for wrongful death asked you on the witness stand if it is true you were taught to “shoot until the suspect was neutralized?” I hope you will be able to say you were taught to use only the amount of force necessary to stop the threat.

Your attorney will thank you.

peace to you

 

[kyredneck]

the family suing you for wrongful death

That 'suing' is a double edged sword that cuts both ways. This story has only just begun.

 

[canadyjd]

I see that as one of two reasons

1) you are an undercover LEO
2) You are neither which.....

No need to speculate. I don’t want to share it. If you think that disqualifies me from participation in this thread just say so and I will stop.

peace to you

 

[Reynolds]

And when the attorney for the family suing you for wrongful death asked you on the witness stand if it is true you were taught to “shoot until the suspect was neutralized?” I hope you will be able to say you were taught to use only the amount of force necessary to stop the threat.

Your attorney will thank you.

peace to you

The THREAT is neutralized. The suspect is not neutralized. I said that plainly the first post I used "neutralize".

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

And when the attorney for the family suing you for wrongful death asked you on the witness stand if it is true you were taught to “shoot until the suspect was neutralized?” I hope you will be able to say you were taught to use only the amount of force necessary to stop the threat.

And how often is it good strategy to put someone accused of murder on the witness stand?
There should be plenty of experts available to answer the question without requiring that move.

 

[canadyjd]

Not at all different when you're aware of the race card that's being played by our commie corrupt media. They'd love nothing better, yay, it's their aim to incite/inject racial hatred into the current political atmosphere. They've played this 'hate card' over and over and over again over the decades in many different countries with great success for the Marxist cause.

I’m really not looking at political gamesmanship after the event. I’m trying to assess the legal argument for self-defense on the part of the father/son and find it lacking on many levels.

The facts will be presented in court. If the video of the shooting reveals any shots after someone is on the ground, conviction is certain. I would not be surprised with guilty pleas to manslaughter to avoid 2nd degree murder.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

And how often is it good strategy to put someone accused of murder on the witness stand?
There should be plenty of experts available to answer the question without requiring that move.

I was referring to a civil lawsuit, not criminal case.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

The THREAT is neutralized. The suspect is not neutralized. I said that plainly the first post I used "neutralize".

When you say “neutralize the threat” you mean to shoot the suspect until he is dead, don’t you?

peace to you

 

[Reynolds]

When you say “neutralize the threat” you mean to shoot the suspect until he is dead, don’t you?

peace to you

Nope. I mean shoot until he no longer has both the means and the opportunity to put my life in jeopardy.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

When you say “neutralize the threat” you mean to shoot the suspect until he is dead, don’t you?

That doesn't follow at all, and I suspect you are fully aware of that. I can see that if a lawyer is going to take that sort of devilish tack, an expert in addition to the accused will have to be called to explain it carefully to the jury, and hopefully in the process embarrass the lawyer to the point of boisterous courtroom laughter.

 

[canadyjd]

The THREAT is neutralized. The suspect is not neutralized. I said that plainly the first post I used "neutralize".

Did you know Webster’s dictionary defines “neutralize” as “to kill or destroy” especially in military style situations?

Isn’t it true that SWAT teams are considered paramilitary style organizations?

Isn’t it true that when you stated you intended to neutralize the threat, you meant you intended to shoot to kill the suspect....isn’t it true?

Why give lawyers ammunition?

Wouldn’t it be better to just say, “I used the amount of force necessary to stop the threat”?

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

That doesn't follow at all, and I suspect you are fully aware of that. I can see that if a lawyer is going to take that sort of devilish tack, an expert in addition to the accused will have to be called to explain it carefully to the jury, and hopefully in the process embarrass the lawyer to the point of boisterous courtroom laughter.

Yes, I can see lawyers twisting your words into knots on the stand and who knows how a jury will react.

Which sounds better to a jury?

“I neutralized the threat” or “I used the amount of force necessary to stop the threat”

peace to you

 

[Reynolds]

Did you know Webster’s dictionary defines “neutralize” as “to kill or destroy” especially in military style situations?

Isn’t it true that SWAT teams are considered paramilitary style organizations?

Isn’t it true that when you stated you intended to neutralize the threat, you meant you intended to shoot to kill the suspect....isn’t it true?

Why give lawyers ammunition?

Wouldn’t it be better to just say, “I used the amount of force necessary to stop the threat”?

peace to you

to make (something) ineffective; counteract; nullify:carelessness that neutralized our efforts.
Military. to put out of action or make incapable of action:to neutralize an enemy position.

 

[canadyjd]

Nope. I mean shoot until he no longer has both the means and the opportunity to put my life in jeopardy.

So if he has the means but lacks the opportunity, you keep shooting, right? That is what you said, correct? You keep shooting until both the means and the opportunity are no longer present, correct?

So, the suspect fell to the ground and the knife is still in his hand. You are ten feet away and he is on his back with a knife in his hand. He has means, the knife, but lacks opportunity to harm you since he can’t harm you unless he gets up.

By your definition, you keep shooting until he no longer possesses the means (knife) to harm you, correct? That is how you “neutralize” a threat?

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

to make (something) ineffective; counteract; nullify:carelessness that neutralized our efforts.
Military. to put out of action or make incapable of action:to neutralize an enemy position.

Are you saying you had no idea that the word “neutralize” can be used in military and paramilitary type situations to mean kill or destroy?

peace to you

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Yes, I can see lawyers twisting your words into knots on the stand and who knows how a jury will react.
Which sounds better to a jury?
“I neutralized the threat” or “I used the amount of force necessary to stop the threat”

I would suggest that a lawyer planning such a tactic be very sure she can make the definition stick. If another is the applicable one, a jury is unlikely to be positively impressed by the obvious attempt to twist the truth, or the incompetent ignorance of the lawyer, depending.

 

[Salty]

No need to speculate. I don’t want to share it. If you think that disqualifies me from participation in this thread just say so and I will stop.

peace to you

s
not trying to stop you at all - feel free to continue
But It is interesting to be aware of the background of folks who have interesting opinions

 

[kyredneck]

Oopsie! AJC Video Appears to Show Ahmaud Arbery Entering Home on McMichael's Street, Running Out After He's Spotted By Neighbor

 

[Reynolds]

So if he has the means but lacks the opportunity, you keep shooting, right? That is what you said, correct? You keep shooting until both the means and the opportunity are no longer present, correct?

So, the suspect fell to the ground and the knife is still in his hand. You are ten feet away and he is on his back with a knife in his hand. He has means, the knife, but lacks opportunity to harm you since he can’t harm you unless he gets up.

By your definition, you keep shooting until he no longer possesses the means (knife) to harm you, correct? That is how you “neutralize” a threat?

peace to you

When he ceases to possess both means and opportunity, deadly force application stops. If he loses one, he no longer has both.

 

[Reynolds]

Are you saying you had no idea that the word “neutralize” can be used in military and paramilitary type situations to mean kill or destroy?

peace to you

I know all its definitions.