Texas SOT

When trial courts go stupid on self defense law (aka, know the law)

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 16, 2010
    88
    1
    Boston, MA
    I recently came across a 2011 self defense case in which the prosecution, the defense, and the judge all got the law completely backwards on the reading of a brief and rather straightforward self defense statute.


    The result was that the defendant, who might well have been acquitted on the basis of self defense without this error, was instead convicted of second degree manslaughter and sentenced to 20 years in prison. Somehow, every expertly trained legal professional in the court room managed to make a mistake I wouldn’t have expected from a first year law student. And, of course, it was the defendant who paid the price.


    Although this particular case is out of Kentucky, trust me, mistakes like this happen in every state, and far too often. All the more reason why it is essential that all armed citizens have at least a basic working competence in the self defense laws of their jurisdiction (or anywhere they might go). Just because you're paying your defense lawyer a lot of money doesn't mean he's not going to make a stupid mistake--and if he does, it's you who pays the price. Know the law.


    If you're interested in more details on how something like this occurs, the case citation is Barker v. Commonwealth, 341 S.W.3d 112 (KY Supreme Court 2011). Alternatively, you can read my analysis/narrative about the case on my blog page at: KY When trial courts go stupid on self defense law . . . .


    Andrew
    Lynx Defense
     

    Mic

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 3, 2009
    2,991
    46
    Austin
    Interesting case. I'm going to relate this case to Texas.

    While we don't have the same language in Texas, I believe the shooter would be justified in Texas as well.

    Quick summary: The shooter had slashed the victims tires and took off. The victim, grabbed a handgun and went after him. The shooter shot him in self defense. He was eventually released because although he had provoked the victim, he did not do so with the intent of causing death or serious bodily injury (Andrew, correct me if I'm wrong).

    I believe he would be justified here because even though he provoked the encounter, he had disengaged from the activity provoking.

    Now, personal opinion that has nothing to do with the law - you deserve to have yourself shot if you're out slashing people's tires.
     
    Top Bottom