Police respond to report of shooting at pro-Israeli protest in Newton

[Dench]

To @42! 's point above, it's not about the objective risk - it's about the subjective perception of the victim. Someone tackles you from behind, gets on top of your back, and starts hitting - I'd say it's entirely reasonable to fear for your life without having to interview the attacker to inquire about his intent.

Solo absolutely

 

[pastera]

I suspect this guy would have trouble with this shooting even in FL. He'd probably get iff here, but it would be costly.

What was that fight? 1 vs 3? 1 vs 4? Its going to be difficult to convince a jury that the guy who had over whelming direct assistance was about to die or be maimed.

Unless the state can show that the three had an ongoing relationship it would be hard to prove 3 on 1 since bystanders have zero responsibility to inject themselves into an affray.

It was a 1:1 where bystanders decided to assist the person who was attacked by soy boy.

 

[pastera]

Devils advocate is going to ask in court: when was he in immediate danger of death?

Why do people here keep truncating the standard?
Grave bodily injury was objectively an imminent risk with the guy on top and reaching for his head. The vet couldn't reasonably be expected to know the two other people were about to intervene.

People on NES not from FL seem to know a whole lot anout FLs stand your ground law. You just cant shoot someone solely based off battery. There needs to be more in many cases. Its an extremely subjective law.

It may be subjective but this one goes to the shooter
Attacked from behind by an angry unhinged younger person.
Fighting from beneath
Fires one shot then realized that others were intervening then stops aggression.
Renders aid.

You roll the dice with any jury and a Newtown jury hands you weighted dice, but this was a relatively clean shoot.

 

[WJ406]

SELF-DEFENSE; DEFENSE OF ANOTHER; DEFENSE OF PROPERTY

Sorry if this has already been posted, but every person who owns a firearm for self defense should read their state’s jury instructions regarding this. This is what a jury will be guided by if this ever goes to trial.

 

[Dench]

Why do people here keep truncating the standard?
Grave bodily injury was objectively an imminent risk with the guy on top and reaching for his head.

I dont personally agree.

 

[WJ406]

Why do people here keep truncating the standard?
Grave bodily injury was objectively an imminent risk with the guy on top and reaching for his head. The vet couldn't reasonably be expected to know the two other people were about to intervene.




It may be subjective but this one goes to the shooter
Attacked from behind by an angry unhinged younger person.
Fighting from beneath
Fires one shot then realized that others were intervening then stops aggression.
Renders aid.

You roll the dice with any jury and a Newtown jury hands you weighted dice, but this was a relatively clean shoot.

I agree. Also the fact that his bail was only $5000 and there was no 58A hearing is interesting.

 

[HeDidIt]

He was very close to shooting his friend, holy crap!

He was of that, " friendly fire, what friendly fire?" Lol

 

[HARRYM]

It’s cute that some of you guys are using the “BuT MUh RIghTZ” argument. It’s like you’re not paying attention.

Yes, you have the God-given right to preserve your life; but do you feel confident enough the court will agree you needed to shoot someone and are you willing to risk jail time and possibly bankruptcy?

You have mere seconds to understand you have been attacked, you have no idea if they are armed, what their intentions are....seconds....if you ask the attacker for a time out perhaps then you can ponder the legal aspects.

 

[HeDidIt]

I agree that the retard should have been shot, maybe even sooner. But if we look at it from a duty to retreat standpoint, then clearly the shooter failed to retreat.

It seems that he did retreat to the pavement.

 

[MaroonedinMA]

The GFM for this guys defense is up to $207K as of now. If he can tap it, he may not be completely ruined by court costs. Either way, I was happy to donate to his defense - his only crime was missing the double tap.

 

[Glass Half Empty]

Devils advocate is going to ask in court: when was he in immediate danger of death?

People on NES not from FL seem to know a whole lot anout FLs stand your ground law. You just cant shoot someone solely based off battery. There needs to be more in many cases. Its an extremely subjective law.

He was in immediate danger of serious bodily harm and/or death when he found himself on the ground with someone on top of him , pummeling him. He could even say the attacker seen or felt his gun and was going for it.

 

[HeDidIt]

He was in immediate danger of serious bodily harm and/or death when he found himself on the ground with someone on top of him , pummeling him. He could even say the attacker seen or felt his gun and was going for it.

I would say touched my nuts and it's sexual assault. Pew pew.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The GFM for this guys defense is up to $207K as of now. If he can tap it, he may not be completely ruined by court costs. Either way, I was happy to donate to his defense - his only crime was missing the double tap.

The GFM $$ are at risk until he withdraws.

Until he was found not guilty, Gofundme refused to disburse payments to Zimmerman for legal defense for a violent act - basically an assumption of guilt. The founder of this GFM campaign should get the money out ASAP.

The shooter is lucky the demographics of the shootee are such that they don't appear to be any race based advocacy groups calling for his head.

He was in immediate danger of serious bodily harm and/or death when he found himself on the ground with someone on top of him , pummeling him. He could even say the attacker seen or felt his gun and was going for it.

Hmmm... from watching videos it appears police routinely yell "stop resisting" and "let go of my gun" loudly when being filmed.

 

[paul73]

The GFM $$ are at risk until he withdraws.

Until he was found not guilty, Gofundme refused to disburse payments for legal defense for a violent act - basically an assumption of guilt. The founder of this GFM campaign should get the money out ASAP.

The shooter is lucky the demographcs of the shootee are such that they don't appear to be any race based advocacy groups calling for his head.

it is amazing how firmly new age socialists grabbed this whole society by the balls, as an every single aspect of life now is under control of the proper narratives and allegiance to 'correct' causes. no deviation is allowed, and no help to the enemy side is allowed.

 

[headednorth]

Why do people here keep truncating the standard?
Grave bodily injury was objectively an imminent risk with the guy on top and reaching for his head. The vet couldn't reasonably be expected to know the two other people were about to intervene.




It may be subjective but this one goes to the shooter
Attacked from behind by an angry unhinged younger person.
Fighting from beneath
Fires one shot then realized that others were intervening then stops aggression.
Renders aid.

You roll the dice with any jury and a Newtown jury hands you weighted dice, but this was a relatively clean shoot.

Any legal experts here who can tell us the odds of the video being declared inadmissible by a judge? Wouldnt surprise me tbh

 

[Dench]

He was in immediate danger of serious bodily harm and/or death when he found himself on the ground with someone on top of him , pummeling him. He could even say the attacker seen or felt his gun and was going for it.

Are we watching the same video?

 

[Lowbird]

Any legal experts here who can tell us the odds of the video being declared inadmissible by a judge? Wouldnt surprise me tbh

This was my first thought.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

Hmmm... from watching videos it appears police routinely yell "stop resisting" and "let go of my gun" loudly when being filmed.

mental note……….

 

[jkelly1229]

It’s cute that some of you guys are using the “BuT MUh RIghTZ” argument. It’s like you’re not paying attention.

Yes, you have the God-given right to preserve your life; but do you feel confident enough the court will agree you needed to shoot someone and are you willing to risk jail time and possibly bankruptcy?

Im certainly willing to find out if i was in his shoes

 

[jkelly1229]

Did you see the quality of his backup??

It was 1 on 1

Backup is a strong word... more like did you see those 2 chicks do nothing while the two combatants were sorting it out

 

[Bonesinium]

So Mr. Chin Diaper crosses the street to attack somebody. The victim fires one shot while on the ground with the attacker on top of him, and then with the help of others pull the guy off. How would this not be a reasonable use of force?

 

[jkelly1229]

Why do people here keep truncating the standard?
Grave bodily injury was objectively an imminent risk with the guy on top and reaching for his head. The vet couldn't reasonably be expected to know the two other people were about to intervene.




It may be subjective but this one goes to the shooter
Attacked from behind by an angry unhinged younger person.
Fighting from beneath
Fires one shot then realized that others were intervening then stops aggression.
Renders aid.

You roll the dice with any jury and a Newtown jury hands you weighted dice, but this was a relatively clean shoot.

And I'm guessing he knew those 2 dudes... even if he knew they were gonna intervene I'm sure he was like well they are gonna be as useful as serving mexican at a gay orgy

 

[headednorth]

mental note……….

My favorite is the simultaneous "Dont move" from Cop A and "Show me your hands" from Cop B.

 

[Garys]

Because of GFM policies, a number of people are using Give, Send, Go. It's Christian based, so I don't know what policies they might have on something like this. Wikipedia doesn't like them, so it must be okay. They're Boston based.

The GFM $$ are at risk until he withdraws.

Until he was found not guilty, Gofundme refused to disburse payments for legal defense for a violent act - basically an assumption of guilt. The founder of this GFM campaign should get the money out ASAP.

The shooter is lucky the demographcs of the shootee are such that they don't appear to be any race based advocacy groups calling for his head.



Hmmm... from watching videos it appears police routinely yell "stop resisting" and "let go of my gun" loudly when being filmed.

 

[M1911]

If you’re not interested in this particular geopolitical issue, that’s fine, but until this incident these “protests” didn’t even warrant a single cop nearby.

I'm very concerned about this particular geopolitical issue. But I'm also aware that it is a very emotional issue and, in my opinion, it isn't surprising that violence occured, even at a small rally. I'm not going to be there. My attending such a rally won't change anyone's mind and it exposes me to unnecessary risk.

 

[MAGA99]

Backup is a strong word... more like did you see those 2 chicks do nothing while the two combatants were sorting it out

I mean, I GUESS you could say an effort was made, but it was not much of an effort at all!!

 

[M1911]

Why do people here keep truncating the standard?
Grave bodily injury was objectively an imminent risk with the guy on top and reaching for his head. The vet couldn't reasonably be expected to know the two other people were about to intervene.

Because the guy wasn't on top and wasn't reaching for his head. At least not what I saw. What I saw is that they were mostly side by side on the ground. The vet wasn't mounted and the perp wasn't banging the vet's head against the sidewalk. The video wasn't great so maybe I'm just missing something.

 

[MAGA99]

And I'm guessing he knew those 2 dudes... even if he knew they were gonna intervene I'm sure he was like well they are gonna be as useful as serving mexican at a gay orgy

The Mexican would at least keep things, well lubricated?!?!!

 

[MAGA99]

So Mr. Chin Diaper crosses the street to attack somebody. The victim fires one shot while on the ground with the attacker on top of him, and then with the help of others pull the guy off. How would this not be a reasonable use of force?

Mass

 

[not new guy]

You guys are too focused on the outcome of the court case. Just because you legally can shoot somebody doesn’t mean it’s in your best interest to shoot them.