Posted by 357 Terms: And yet we are being told things based on speculation and not fact.
No--based on established legal principles and upon standard, accepted criminal investigative techniques. It's very, very basic law stuff.
The fact that one does not have access to a self defense case in which there is knowledge of how hand loaded ammunition may have played a part means nothing to an attorney; he or she will base his or her assessment on other relevant facts. Fiddletown, who is an attorney, has explained why there are little data on SD shootings involving handloads:
- Very few people have intentionally shot other people with handloads.
- Of those who have, not all have claimed self defense.
- Of those who did, not all were charged.
- Of those who were charged, not all were faced with having insufficient evidence to support a defense of justification or with contradictory evidence.
- Of those who were faced with that predicament, none that we know of have hinged on the admissibility of GSR test results of their exemplar rounds.
The first criterion probably reduces the number of cases to be further evaluated to a handful.
So--with so little to look at. why worry? Simply because (1) once a person
has intentionally shot someone else with hand loads, (2)
unless the evidence in support of a defense of justification is clear, and (3)
if the state's case depends in part on the lack of GSR evidence on the person shot, the rules of evidence can cook the proverbial goose of the shooter. Never mind that few people end up in that situation.
Once you do, it's a very serious situation indeed.
So--when might a shooting with handloads prove problematical? Let's evaluate that by answering when it will
not be a problem.
If the shooting involved a forcible entry of one's home, it won't matter what he or she used. The case will hinge on other factors, such as any prior connection between the parties.
If the shooting occurred out of doors and all of the witnesses, or at least all except the person shot, support the defendant's account of the evidence, it won't matter.
If the evidence, forensic and otherwise, clearly supports the defendant's account, it won't matter.
Whether or not the evidence favors the defendant, if a lack of GSR on the person shot is not pertinent to either side's account of the incident, it won't matter.
If the shooter cannot provide at least some evidence on each point in a self defense case and he or she does not end up with a favorable jury instruction, it won't matter--it will not be tried as a self defense case anyway.
What does that leave? Let's look at when the use of handloads
may prove problematical:
The shooter states that the shooting occurred at relatively short range;
witness testimony, which is notoriously unreliable, disputes the defendant's account on that and perhaps other aspects of the case;
other evidence contradicts the defendant's account--for an example, suppose that the shooter's empty cases have rolled or have been blown to a point other than that from where the defendant says he or she fired; ....
...the lack of gunshot residue on the person shot indicates that the distance at which the shooting took place was greater than what the defendant claimed; and finally...
test results of the defendant's rounds would help to support his or her credibility.
These are the things that may determine whether it was a "good shoot"'
Too many ifs? Consider that even if the likelihood is low, the potential consequence is losing one's clean record, personal fortune, and personal freedom.
What are the chances? Well, it's only anecdotal, but the analysis that Tom Givens provides in his DVD "Lessons from the Street" indicate that one is more likely to have to use his forearm to defend oneself outdoors than in the home.
Take a look around you. Are you confident that if you do have to shoot, you will have an abundance of evidence and favorable testimony to ensure your prosperous future?
If you think that because you know that you are a good guy the outcome will be a slam dunk, read
this.
We will never convince those who will not listen or who cannot understand these concepts, but perhaps we can help others make informed decisions.
