Man gets sucker punched, pulls out weapons and kills the perp… You Decide…

[Rat187]

Why is it it "Called the Knockout Game" by the media, LEO and the courts?

 

[M1911]

I see your point, for sure; but see my post 74

The law is unlikely to change. Until and unless the law changes, people who carry for self defense need to know what the law is now.

 

[Rat187]

We're being verbally sucker punched

 

[Rat187]

The law is unlikely to change. Until and unless the law changes, people who carry for self defense need to know what the law is now.

The law is unlikely to change until the violence is committed against a liberal elites loved one....watch how fast it changes

 

[M1911]

The law is unlikely to change until the violence is committed against a liberal elites loved one....watch how fast it changes

Nope, that’s not going to change it. Instead, they will blame guns. Self help is not recommended by types like Maura.

 

[headednorth]

I’m glad I wasn’t involved and there’s one less piece of shit on the street

Maybe two if the shooter is a dirtbag too. Fingers crossed for a win-win

 

[Buck F]

Meh.

I‘d still vote to convict of murder. What the guy did was completely unlawful.

Two things can be true: What he did was unlawful but I wouldn’t vote to convict.

 

[pastera]

The potential seriousness of the sucker punch isn't carte blanche afterwards to kill the guy. Use of deadly force in self-defense ultimately rests on believing it is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. Where's the "prevention" here? This looks more like an altercation with a backstory than a SD shooting.

Correct
However if I'm on the jury the guy is walking unless he had provoked the attack immediately prior

 

[Echo 225]

already out the door.should of kept going. guilty 2nd degree

 

[headednorth]

Reminds me about this sad story.

Retired Connecticut State Trooper Killed In Las Vegas

A confrontation at the bottom of an escalator early Sunday morning led to the death of a retired 22-year veteran of the CT State Police.

patch.com

Nog (of course) got 8-20 years. He also ko'd another guy in a 7-11 that night. Former boxer from NY with a million priors

 

[Picton]

Two things can be true: What he did was unlawful but I wouldn’t vote to convict.

I don't want jurors who apply their own biases. I want jurors who apply the law. Which kind of juror would you prefer if you were the defendant, for anything? You want a fair trial. You won't get that if jurors are disregarding the law.

@M1911 is entirely correct, up in post 93: if you're going to carry, it's on you to know the law. The law as it IS, not the law as you want it to be. You don't get to kill people in revenge. You just don't.

 

[Bonesinium]

If I were on the jury he’d walk. I don’t care about the actual law anymore, why bother, no one else does.

Sadly, from a pragmatic position, I’m not sure I could disagree.

I don’t like anything about this incident. The sucker punch. The retreat and then return and shooting. Probably not a proportional response but then again, this is Shitcago and who knows. If this thug was willing to sucker punch someone like that, it’s unlikely just walking away would end the situation. She the apparent victim decided to end it himself. I don’t like it but I get it.

It’s a tough one where the shooter probably deserves some punishment but it shouldn’t be anything severe.

 

[Rat187]

Nope, that’s not going to change it. Instead, they will flame guns. Self help is not recommended by types like Maura.

I understand, that will change, hopefully sooner than later.

 

[Rat187]

Picton's in the funny picture thread....lol

 

[Bonesinium]

I don't want jurors who apply their own biases. I want jurors who apply the law.

Beyond a reasonable doubt is the legal standard, and I want jurors who take that to heart, truly believe people are innocent unless proven otherwise, and apply meaning to what laws are meant. If there’s any biases, and it’s in favor of the individual and not the state, yes, I want jurors with biases. I want jurors that can think for themselves and don’t need to be told what to think.

 

[Picton]

Picton's in the funny picture thread....lol

Look, don't take my word for it.

Do what the punch victim in this thread did and see what you get convicted of. I think you'll be unpleasantly surprised.

 

[Picton]

Beyond a reasonable doubt is the legal standard, and I want jurors who take that to heart, truly believe people are innocent unless proven otherwise, and apply meaning to what laws are meant. If there’s any biases, and it’s in favor of the individual and not the state, yes, I want jurors with biases. I want jurors that can think for themselves and don’t need to be told what to think.

Uh huh.

And in this case? Based on the video? Given whatever understanding of SD, manslaughter, and murder you have? What would you say the shooter here is likely to be found guilty of?

Reminder: he was halfway out a door and could have just kept right on walking...

 

[M1911]

I understand, that will change, hopefully sooner than later.

I strongly disagree.

 

[meh]

Correct
However if I'm on the jury the guy is walking unless he had provoked the attack immediately prior

Yeah, but if they catch the shooter, some jurors are going to get the opportunity to do exactly that, because not getting charged in the first place isn't likely.

A lot of people seem to be regarding this as an example of the suckerpunching problem in general, where some punk hauls off and slugs a randomly chosen victim on the street, e.g. Martin Short. But when that happens, doesn't the perp usually try to escape without delay? I don't know what happened here, or why. Were they strangers? Was there some provocation from earlier? Was the puncher schizophrenic or high? The prosecutor is going to construct a narrative that the shooter picked himself up, walked towards the door with a normal gait (no signs of disorientation) as if leaving, used his feigned retreat as an opportunity to draw his gun, delayed action until he was in the open doorway so as to be able to make a quick escape, then shot his assailant in retaliation, and fled. The defense will need to argue that he was disoriented even though he didn't show it and that this colored his perception of a continuing threat. Either way, he fled and apparently didn't report the incident, which is hardly going help his SD claim.

 

[Rat187]

Look, don't take my word for it.

Do what the punch victim in this thread did and see what you get convicted of. I think you'll be unpleasantly surprised.

Look I get it....Thanks

 

[headednorth]

Either way, he fled and apparently didn't report the incident, which is hardly going help his SD claim.

I have no idea why this matters. If you charge me with a samurai sword screaming "I'm going to kill you" and I shoot you dead, I'd be justified in doing so. How does that change if I walk away afterwards instead of hanging around?

 

[Picton]

I have no idea why this matters. If you charge me with a samurai sword screaming "I'm going to kill you" and I shoot you dead, I'd be justified in doing so. How does that change if I walk away afterwards instead of hanging around?

Well, that's not even remotely what happened in this case...

 

[Rat187]

Unless no-one is noticing people are increasingly refusing to be victims, Blame society, whatever but this is a fact. I don't advocate any violence period but you can only push your 'luck' so far.

 

[Bt74]

Look, don't take my word for it.

Do what the punch victim in this thread did and see what you get convicted of. I think you'll be unpleasantly surprised.

And when you get bagged for one of Maura's "post ban" ar15 mags, I hope you still have the same attitude.

 

[Bt74]

Witnesses: Sucker punch led to head hitting floor in Portsmouth bar assault

Prosecutors in Portsmouth, N.H. said a man died after another man punched him in the head at a bar over the weekend.

www.boston25news.com

 

[headednorth]

Well, that's not even remotely what happened in this case...

I understand. The post I was replying to said, "Either way, he fled and apparently didn't report the incident, which is hardly going help his SD claim." I'm curious why that matters either way.

What happened, happened. The second its over, it was either justified or not. How does staying around, leaving, reporting, not reporting, etc change that?

 

[meh]

I have no idea why this matters. If you charge me with a samurai sword screaming "I'm going to kill you" and I shoot you dead, I'd be justified in doing so. How does that change if I walk away afterwards instead of hanging around?

It doesn't matter a lot, to be sure. Fleeing is generally going to be OK since the scene of the attack isn't safe. But any video of the incident will show an act of self-defense. If the sucker punch had not been caught on video, how would this incident look any different from a hit?

 

[Picton]

And when you get bagged for one of Maura's "post ban" ar15 mags, I hope you still have the same attitude.

And my orange tastes better than your apple.

 

[pastera]

Yeah, but if they catch the shooter, some jurors are going to get the opportunity to do exactly that, because not getting charged in the first place isn't likely.

A lot of people seem to be regarding this as an example of the suckerpunching problem in general, where some punk hauls off and slugs a randomly chosen victim on the street, e.g. Martin Short. But when that happens, doesn't the perp usually try to escape without delay? I don't know what happened here, or why. Were they strangers? Was there some provocation from earlier? Was the puncher schizophrenic or high? The prosecutor is going to construct a narrative that the shooter picked himself up, walked towards the door with a normal gait (no signs of disorientation) as if leaving, used his feigned retreat as an opportunity to draw his gun, delayed action until he was in the open doorway so as to be able to make a quick escape, then shot his assailant in retaliation, and fled. The defense will need to argue that he was disoriented even though he didn't show it and that this colored his perception of a continuing threat. Either way, he fled and apparently didn't report the incident, which is hardly going help his SD claim.

I think you misunderstood my position

The shooter was absolutely outside of the legal window for dead force defense.
I am positing that he was absolutely within the MORAL duty to remove a randomly violent person from the public square.
My only caveat is if the shooter had immediately provoked the dead guy and we aren't seeing the lead-up.

 

[M1911]

I have no idea why this matters. If you charge me with a samurai sword screaming "I'm going to kill you" and I shoot you dead, I'd be justified in doing so. How does that change if I walk away afterwards instead of hanging around?

It is viewed as a sign of a guilty conscience if you flee. If the scene isn’t safe and you remove yourself but call the police, that’s different.

But if you run off and don’t call the police to report the incident and they have to track you down? Then the police and prosecutor will likely argue that you knew the shooting wasn’t justified, which is why you tried to not get caught.

I suggest you read The Law of Self Defense by attorney Andrew Branca.

Edited to add: both Branca and Ayoob say that the first person to call the police is often viewed as the victim. There have been more than a few incidents where a dirtbag threatens a citizen, the citizen draws but doesn’t shoot, both leave, but the dirtbag calls the police to report that he was just minding his business when someone pulled a gun on him.