After the fact....

[Crapshoot]

I was reading a post asking if anybody had to ever draw in self defense, and it got me wondering if anybody could share an experience about what happened after a situation where they were actually forced to open fire. Here's a related clip on suggestions of what you should do.


http://link.brightcove.com/services/pla ... 6359316001" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[lonewolf]

Good video..

[LaserTex]

Awesome post! Thank you!

Doug

P.S. The 9mm vs .380 video was next in the que...saw that post right before this one. Thanks for that one 2.

[Wisewr]

Here are two videos entitled "Don't Talk to Cops" parts 1 & 2. The first one is a lawyers point of view and the second one is a former officer. They are quite long, but I thought they were very informative.

Part 1
Part 2

[ELB]

There's two or three massive threads on this around here someplace .... , but since John Farnam sent an email out just today about this very subject, I'll add a post to this thread too...

7 Sept 09

Courtroom Poker in CO. This from one of our Instructors who is also a
well-known criminal-defense attorney:

"Just handed down on appeal here in CO:

The defendant had claimed self defense and appealed the judgment of
conviction entered on a jury verdict that found him guilty of second-degree
assault and conspiracy to commit second-degree assault.

The judgment was just affirmed on appeal.

Two important points:

(1) Defendant contended that the Trial Court's jury instructions with
regard to what constitutes legitimate self-defense were inadequate and
incomplete. The jury should have been informed that the defendant had 'no duty to
retreat' under State Law. But, the Appellate Court ruled that the Trial
Court was not required to provide that specific information to the jury,
sua sponte (without being asked to do so). Therefore, the Trial Court's
omission does not constitute reversible error.

(2) Defendant also argued that the Trial Court erred in permitting the
prosecutor to argue that the defendant's flight in the aftermath of the
incident demonstrated 'consciousness-of-guilt.' But, the Appellate Court
indicated that such an argument on the part of the prosecutor was not improper and
that it is indeed reasonable for the jury to infer that the defendant fled
because he had a 'guilty conscience.'"

Comment: I know there is a lot of legal mumbo-jumbo that comes out of every
court action, but, from the foregoing, we all need to reconfirm.

(1) Get a good lawyer! Not everyone with a law degree is someone your
want representing your best interests during the fight of your life. This is
no place for amateurs and incompetents!

(2) When involved in a lethal confrontation, or a potentially lethal one,
be the first to call the police! Don't run and hide and hope no one will
find you. Get a safe distance away when necessary, but get to a phone fast
and meet police at the scene, identifying yourself as "the one who called."
Much guilt will be inferred when you spontaneously "flee," as we see!

/John