1 shot too many?

[Ballstater98]

A recent Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed multiple shots can undercut a claim of self-defense. I am looking past this case's details toward future implications. Define multiple shots. Who's to say where that line is?

Pdf : Walton v. State ruling of Indiana Court of Appeals

 

[foszoe]

Can't wait to hear from the lawyers

 

[ArcadiaGP]

In the heat of the moment, how do you know the assailant/attacker is 100% safe and stopped?

 

[SEIndSAM]

All the training that I have had stressed shoot until the threat was neutralized. How many shots is that????

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Facts matter, and it all comes back to reasonable.

There is way more going on there then multiple shots. One fact is not looked at in a vacuum.

 

[eldirector]

That case reference s HOOD V. State:
https://casetext.com/case/hood-v-state-81

So, 2 shots. Assailant did not fall, but staggered back. According to witness testimony, was trying to flee. Fire 4 more shots. Then flee the scene.

Yeah, don't do that.

 

[Dosproduction]

Yeah my understanding was shoot till there is no more threat. Is this wrong. And if so are police going to be held to the same standard?

 

[stephen87]

I think you can prove nine shots is reasonable. I think a lot of this had to do with nine shots plus fleeing the scene.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I think you can prove nine shots is reasonable. I think a lot of this had to do with nine shots plus fleeing the scene.

And no reasonable fear for his life. One shot was too many.

 

[stephen87]

And no reasonable fear for his life. One shot was too many.

Absolutely. I'm not saying THIS specific case. If an attacker had a gun and was pumped up on adrenaline, nine shots could be reasonable. Nine shots into a possibly unarmed assailant (could have a lighter and gas can, idk) is a lot. Nine shots into him and taking off, in my eyes, shows no self defense.

 

[foszoe]

Perhaps 2 shots followed by dousing the guy with his own gasoline and offering him a cigarette would have saved the trouble as the resulting explosion would have given credence to fleeing the scene?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Ok, now that I'm on a real computer.

There is no impact on the future. The cases cited date back to at least 2001. This is not new ground or new rules.

If you shoot multiple times and claim self defense, you're going to have to be able to justify why you shot multiple times. No one is saying "this many" is too many or not enough. The facts and the situation are going to determine that. 2 may be too many, 20 may be completely justified. When you shoot someone and claim self defense, the State must overcome that claim. Multiple shots is simply one of a multitude of factors that goes into making that determination.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

1 shot too many?

Could be. Remember, this has been the law for a long time.

Remember when I used to say "your house is not a free fire zone" and all of INGO got it's nose out of joint? Well, your house is not a free fire zone, just like I said.

Define multiple shots.

2 or more? That was easy.

2, 3, 4, 15, it matters why one was shooting.

Scenario A: Guy, wearing UPS uniform, enters your house, carrying box. 1 shot is too many.

Scenario B: doped up big dude with club who wants to put large sized dent in your cabeza won't stop after you empty gun into him, reload and keep firing.

Depends. Don't believe all the gun shop commando/Timmy Tactical bs about "eye kin dooo whatever I want in meye house". No, you cannot.

What controls is what the reasonable person would do. Is there an imminent fear of death of serious bodily injury? What would the reasonable person say?

All that Timmy Tactical "how to" bs is exactly that, bs. What is important is the "when", not the "how".

No one is saying "this many" is too many or not enough. The facts and the situation are going to determine that. 2 may be too many, 20 may be completely justified. When you shoot someone and claim self defense, the State must overcome that claim. Multiple shots is simply one of a multitude of factors that goes into making that determination.

What he said.

 

[Leadeye]

So, no more carrying the M-11? At 32 rounds a second my old fingers just don't work that quickly.

Maybe I could fit in using a shotgun exemption?

 

[oldpink]

How many times have you heard that the law allows you to keep on shooting until the bad guy is dead?
1) If you shoot, there had better be a definite threat that can't be stopped by other, less violent means.
2) There is no "shoot to kill," and anyone who winds up using deadly force who uses that phrase around the authorities after using it is bound to cause legal action.
3) Shoot to stop the threat, period. No shooting if the foe attempts to flee, before or after you start shooting. No shooting once the foe is down and out of action. And you definitely don't keep shooting just because you're "afraid of getting sued."
4) It needs to be clear from the beginning exactly which person was the aggressor and which was the defender. Doing or saying anything that could possibly cast doubt on you being the latter party is flat stupid.

 

[T.Lex]

Scenario A: Guy, wearing UPS uniform, enters your house, carrying box. 1 shot is too many.

Are you and Relford doing the cosplay thing again?

 

[Denny347]

Remember, you must justify each application of force. Hit the perp with 3 quick shots=1 application. You then pause then fire another 3 rounds (second application). The second application must be looked at separately from the first. It is quite possible that you are good on the first but then overstep on the second. This is at least how LE is judged, self defense will likely be looked at similarly.

 

[foszoe]

It would seem more defensible to shoot 6 times in quick succession rather than 3 pause then 3?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Are you and Relford doing the cosplay thing again?

I'll remind you that we have an ordinance here!

 

[BehindBlueI's]

It would seem more defensible to shoot 6 times in quick succession rather than 3 pause then 3?

Can you explain the pause? Some circumstances it may make perfect sense, in others it may be an execution.