TexasCHLforum.com

Good link I enjoyed and would agree that I'm just not smart enough to think of everything. Better leave that part to the lawyers.

For those who insist they won't talk to the police....who do you think is going to write the first report about what you did?
Someone attacks you. You shoot them. You refuse to speak to the police without a lawyer.
The responding officer still has to write a report. And, the responding officer still has to communicate with the DA's office to see if they think charges should e filed. If it goes to a grand jury, that officer may be a witness. If it goes to trial, he certainly would be a witness.
That said, I'm going to insert a caveat:
Don't go all Joe Horn when you talk to the responding officer. Or when you're on the phone with 911. If you're rightfully defending yourself or someone else and believe that you (or someone else) is the victim, you should be able to articulate that to the responding officer. Tell the officer where it went down. Tell him basic details of what went down (that guy came out of the alley with a knife over his head and told me I have a pretty mouth, and charged me. I was a afraid he was going to kill me. I shot him until he stopped.)
I've been told by several people I trust to avoid giving specific details (it was a smith and wesson revolver. I shot four times.) especially because your mind can lie to you. People think they only shot an attacker once or twice, when they later find out they shot half a magazine.

Read JumpingFrog's post. He articulates it better than I do. Ayoob is considered one of the foremost authorities in the nation on armed defense.

If you can bring yourself to ignore the source, you might find this article to be of interest.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/neill-fra ... ml#s182279" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Elmo

jamisjockey wrote:For those who insist they won't talk to the police....who do you think is going to write the first report about what you did?
Someone attacks you. You shoot them. You refuse to speak to the police without a lawyer.
The responding officer still has to write a report. And, the responding officer still has to communicate with the DA's office to see if they think charges should e filed. If it goes to a grand jury, that officer may be a witness. If it goes to trial, he certainly would be a witness.
That said, I'm going to insert a caveat:
Don't go all Joe Horn when you talk to the responding officer. Or when you're on the phone with 911. If you're rightfully defending yourself or someone else and believe that you (or someone else) is the victim, you should be able to articulate that to the responding officer. Tell the officer where it went down. Tell him basic details of what went down (that guy came out of the alley with a knife over his head and told me I have a pretty mouth, and charged me. I was a afraid he was going to kill me. I shot him until he stopped.)
I've been told by several people I trust to avoid giving specific details (it was a smith and wesson revolver. I shot four times.) especially because your mind can lie to you. People think they only shot an attacker once or twice, when they later find out they shot half a magazine.

Read JumpingFrog's post. He articulates it better than I do. Ayoob is considered one of the foremost authorities in the nation on armed defense.

I guess it matters if you think you can give even a general statement that won't mess something else up later on? If you can't remember details like how many times you shot, it looks like later you were lying even though you've just been through an intensely stressful situation. The people evaluating you have probably never been through the same thing, so won't be able to make the mental leap as easily. JMO

IMHO, INAL and all that jazz.

Your initial statement to the responding officer should give him enough information to understand you were obeying the law, you were scared for your life, and a general synopsis of what happened. From there, you're freaked out, you just had to defend yourself or someone else, and you don't want to make any further statements until you've had a chance to talk to someone.
Odds are, he has been through training that makes him understand the mentality of someone who's in an extremely stressful situation, if he actually hasn't himself been in that exact same situation (fighting for their life).
He is going to be the first person that decides if you belong in jail that night, or if you might actually get to go home with your family.
He is going to be the first person who talks to the DA's office, where it will be determined if charges should be brought against you.

What if you didn't kill the bad guy? You better bet he's going to lie through his teeth about what happened. And he might tell the cop right then and there what his side of the story is.
What if the other witnesses have a dog in the fight? Friends of the bad guy, or people who share an agenda...you better believe they'll tell the cops lies if it means their guy gets off.
What if witnesses saw something other than what happened? The BG has his back turned to the witness. They never saw the knife he tossed in the storm drain after you shot him.
Maybe you missed, or didn't do significant damage to the BG and he had opportunity to flee the scene. How would that look? "No, officer...I know there is a violent felon on the loose, but I'm not going to talk to you until I have a lawyer..."

Sure, there will be a follow up investigation. You better believe I'll have a lawyer present for subsequent interrogations.

When it comes to making really specific statements, use your head. You just got the crap scared out of you, pulled your firearm, and shot someone down. So, are you dead certain you fired four shots? That it was a meat cleaver and not a switchblade? That he was six foot one and not five foot eleven? IMHO, inconsistent statements to the police will be one of the things that gets you the extra hairy eyeball. And that comes from personal conversations with three seperate police officers who are close friends. Most cops can count, and will check your firearm, the casings, and the scene to determine how many shots were fired, exactly what type of weapon the bad guy had, etc etc.

If you want to clam up when first contact with an officer is made, that is well within your rights.

If you don't fill in the blanks for the responding officer(s), someone else who may not have your best interests at heart will.

Joe Horn did almost everything wrong, he's lucky this happened in Pasadena Texas.
Ayoob has got this situation right on.

There is always the fact that every gun owner should very aware of what jurisdictions they travel through and what they can expect from the police and prosecutors.

Last time I saw those videos on talking to the police, they were mainly warning against allowing yourself to be interviewed and questioned. They generally didn't talk much about what to say or not say when the police show up after a shooting. I think you ought to make a basic statement about what happened and why. I think you can coach yourself to say that right. I do think it is a bad idea to then get chatty with the cops and start blubbering while in shock.

Personally, I think that one link from earlier about fleeing the scene is bad advice. If you effectively have no right of self defense because of the police and prosecutors, you have other things you need to be doing rather than planning (online) to break the law.

blackdog8200 wrote:I carry a small card in wallet under my CHL, I hope I never need to use it:

Dear Officer: If I have given this to you, I have unfortunatley had to do what was necessary to defend innocent life. I am willing to sign a criminal complaint against the perpetrator (s). I will point out witnesses and evidence.

As you may have experienced yourself, this is a stressful and traumatic experience for me. Therefore, I wish to make no further statements until I have contacted and attorney and composed myself. I also do not consent to any searches. I will cooperate fully once I have consulted with an attorney and calmed down. As a lawfully armed citizen, I ask for the same courtesy that you would show a fellow officer who was involved in a similar situation.

I have explained to my family that they need not "help" me with the officers and they should remain silent as well.

I am not a lawyer, but I know I need one in the event of a shooting.

While it may seem like a good idea it could easily be argued that it shows premeditation, that you we planning to shoot someone and thus planned what to do in the aftermath of a shooting.

EEllis wrote:While it may seem like a good idea it could easily be argued that it shows premeditation, that you we planning to shoot someone and thus planned what to do in the aftermath of a shooting.

Premeditation to protect yourself in case of a shooting is not illegal.

When I attended the recent Gun Rights Policy Conference in Houston at the end of September, I had the opportunity to stand and chat with Massad Ayoob for about ten minutes, and I specifically referred to his "5 Points" that I quoted on the previous page. viewtopic.php?f=7&t=37811&start=30#p454233" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We discussed it for a bit and he said that a lawyer who advises you to "not say a single word" is really thinking one of three things:

1. You are guilty as heck and better not open your mouth;
2. You are so stupid you better not open your mouth or you will incriminate yourself, or;
3. If you open your mouth you are going to start running off with diarrhea of the mouth and unable to shut up.

Personally, I'll stick with:

1. Point out Perpetrator to Police. ("This man attacked me, clearly showing he is the perpetrator, you are the victim).
2. Tell Police you will "Sign the Complaint". ("I will sign the complaint." Cop language that tells them, "He is the victim complainant, the guy on the ground is the subject of the complaint.)
3. Point out the evidence to the police.
4. Point out Witnesses to Police.
5. Will Give Full Cooperation in 24 hours After speaking with Attorney. (From then on, whatever else is said, "Officer, you know how serious this is. You will have my full cooperation in 24 hours after I have spoken with counsel").

By the way, he was a very nice, down to earth guy, and I enjoyed meeting him very much.

Jaguar wrote:

EEllis wrote:While it may seem like a good idea it could easily be argued that it shows premeditation, that you we planning to shoot someone and thus planned what to do in the aftermath of a shooting.

Premeditation to protect yourself in case of a shooting is not illegal.

But that card will allow a DA to argue that the accused prepared for for what to do after the shooting so the shooting itself was premeditated. Something doesn't have to be illegal for it to used to show state of mind. Now sure the defence would argue just like you are but here you give the prosecution an extra item to throw on the scales that you don't have to and still achieve the same goal. You can make a short statement and then shut your mouth and remove the card from the balance. If you feel that the card is more valuable than any damage it might do then so be it. The shooting itself would determine the risk of such a card. Random carjacking, no problem. Ongoing dispute where the DA might think you were trying to cause a confrontation? Different story.

Almost three years. That deserves a golf clap.

Donf wrote:Joe Horn did almost everything wrong, he's lucky this happened in Pasadena Texas.
Ayoob has got this situation right on.

I listened to Joe Horn's 911 call, I don't know how he got off.

I couldn't read all the latest posts due to coughing and choking from all the dust!