Question For Lawyers And Police. Re: SD Shootings

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trunk Monkey

Trunk Monkey

member
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Messages
4,120
Location
Colorado
I have heard it said on several gun forums that you ought never to post anywhere that you would deliberately be trying to kill a person in a self defense shooting. I’ve always read that the proper terminology is that you are shooting to stop the threat.

The rationale has always been that any post you make on a gun forum indicating that you were trying to kill the bad guy could be used against you in court.

In your professional experience has this ever actually happened?
 
Posted by Trunk Monkey: I have heard it said on several gun forums that you ought never to post anywhere that you would deliberately be trying to kill a person in a self defense shooting. I’ve always read that the proper terminology is that you are shooting to stop the threat.

The rationale has always been that any post you make on a gun forum indicating that you were trying to kill the bad guy could be used against you in court.
Click to expand...
That's just one of the things that you do not want to hear played back.

See this from our sub-forum stickies.

Take the time to study the other stickies.

In your professional experience has this ever actually happened?
Click to expand...
The sticky contains one mention of relevant real-world experience.

I am not an attorney, but I have had a lot of first hand knowledge gained in supporting litigation. More than a little of that showed the problems that can arise from one's having posted, mailed, or simply jotted down comments that can later be used to indicate intent or state of mind.
 
JDs; Massad Ayoob....

I don't have a JD & Im not a law school professor but I would suggest you plan or train to "stop the threat". In the 1980s/1990s, many tactics instructors & even some PDs pushed the "shoot to wound" ideology but that soon transitioned into the "finish the fight" & "lethal force" mindset after events like the Platt-Matix shooting(1986) & the LA/Bank of America(1997) incident.
To shoot to kill is a requirement IMO but it does not mean you can use excessive force or endanger by-standers.
As I've posted in other topics & forums; guns are not toys, props, fashion or political statements. You need to learn how to carry guns & be a mature, prudent adult when making decisions in lethal force events.
Author, sworn LE officer & legal use of force expert; Massad Ayoob has put out a few articles where he directly addressed gun message boards & forum posts.
He also discussed items like wearing gun/logo type clothing & how to avoid lethal force events to start with.
Id suggest reviewing or researching some of Ayoob's older gun magazine articles & columns.
 
As I have said many times, posting on a web site is not like gabbing with your buddies over a few brews in the rec room. It is like going on Hannity with a megaphone. If you shout from the rooftop, maybe fifty people will notice. If you post on this site, there potentially could be 50 million people (or more) reading what you type.

Today, more and more attorneys, on whatever side of an issue, well research every aspect of every plaintiff, defendant, witness, or courthouse janitor, for letters to newspapers, sounding off to friends, network posts, etc. And you can't assume that your "alias" will protect you, especially in a criminal case where the state can serve a warrant on the site owner.

I know it sounds like self-censorship (because it is) but it is also called "discretion". Don't go on a rant and say stuff that could come back to bite you.

Jim
 
Absolutely.....

The recent "high profile" criminal trial in central Florida; based on a event in 02/2012, is a great example.
The subject(who had a valid Florida W/concealed license) was raked over the coals. First by the local media then other sources. :rolleyes:
Due process & "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" were concepts that seemed lost. :mad:
Reportedly, the US DoJ & the Tampa field office of the FBI spent months going over leads/tips/media articles etc trying to build a civil rights case based on the subject's writings, web content, emails, jokes, any little tidbit. :uhoh:
You might say; "hey, so what" but the exact same thing could happen to you just as quick.

Rusty
 
Trunk Monkey said:
...The rationale has always been that any post you make on a gun forum indicating that you were trying to kill the bad guy could be used against you in court.

In your professional experience has this ever actually happened?...
Click to expand...
Whether it's actually happened in connection with a self defense incident I don't know, BUT law enforcement and prosecutors know all about social media and have been learning to use it effectively in criminal investigations and prosecutions.

See this article headlined "Bay Area prosecutors increasingly using social media posts in criminal cases" from the 16 August 2013 edition of the Contra Costa Times:
PLEASANTON -- A teenage driver originally accused of vehicular manslaughter now faces a murder charge in the death of a bicyclist, partly because prosecutors say he bragged on Twitter about driving dangerously.

His case is part of a growing trend of social media posts being used as evidence against suspects, authorities said Friday.

....

As suspects feel compelled to post their misdeeds online for audiences to see, investigators have taken advantage, using the online quasi-confessions to bolster their cases, Bay Area prosecutors said.

In San Francisco, a cyclist in March fatally struck a 71-year-old pedestrian in a crosswalk after speeding through three red lights in the Castro District. Chris Bucchere, who eventually pleaded guilty to felony vehicular manslaughter, received a stiffer charge after he posted his explanation of the crash on a cycling group's website....
Click to expand...
 
Another instance - in this case, a text message comes back to bite in court, even though the would-be groom says he was just being snarky.
========================================

http://www.buffalonews.com/city-reg...n-keep-53000-diamond-engagement-ring-20140405

Judge rules jilted woman can keep $53,000 diamond engagement ring
By Patrick Lakamp | News Staff Reporter | @LakampBuffNews | Google+
on April 5, 2014 - 5:16 PM
 
Interesting post, Fred. Didn't he argue statute of frauds? In NY (and most places) a contract or gift over $500 has to be in writing to be valid. Or is a text message a writing now? Either way, that's an expensive text message.
 
Thanks to everyone who is responding. I really don't have any thing of value to add so I'm just reading your responses
 
Post 7; soc media.....

To answer post 7, to my limited knowledge, no. Author & legal use of force expert: Massad Ayoob put out a column about the event which he briefly mentioned the same topic(s); ie: making threats or statements on soc media/online.

I'd add that many crooks & nitwits now commit crimes then go on Facebook, Twitter or Instagram.
 
As part of our training at Front Sight, it was suggested that we send a certified letter to ourselves describing why we had decided to carry, and under what circumstances we would draw and use our carry weapon.
When it comes back, sign for it, don't open it, and give it to your lawyer.
 
Receipts ....

In the 1980s/1990s, it was highly suggested by a few gun press columnists & writers for CCW license holders/gun owners to subscribe to the magazines to document where or when they might have obtained the material/training methods they used in a lethal force event.
In 2014, Id advise any license holder or armed officer(security, PI, corrections, sworn LE, etc) save or scan & save(sometimes cheap or weak ink fades) the receipts, documents, certificates, etc from any major purchases or training.
After the huge Zimmerman mess of 2013(Sanford Florida), I wouldn't put anything past a prosecutor/DA/civil litigation lawyer. :mad:
 
The best thing to EVER do is keep quiet and let your attorney do the talking for you. Don't say anything to anybody. Just shut up and let the attorney tell your side of things for you. If somebody asks you a question, look at them but say nothing at all. There is a reason that old time cons and gangsters called attorneys by the phrase of "mouthpiece."
 
Rifleman 173 said:
The best thing to EVER do is keep quiet and let your attorney do the talking for you....
Click to expand...
However, if you use force in what you will claim is self defense, that might not be the best idea. We won't discuss that here. It would be off topic for this thread. But the subject was discussed at length here.
 
What Rifleman said. As the police officer will tell you "anything you say can and will be used against you." You should not be posting anything anywhere in that type of situation. You should also be careful about what you tell your family, and forbid them from using social media. Here is a great example of this advice not being followed:

http://www.3dca.flcourts.org/Opinions/3D13-1952.rh.pdf
Click to expand...

Fortunately, this was a civil case and this guy was just out a lot of money. If this had been a criminal case, the guy's daughter's loose lips could have put him in jail.
 
Let's stay on topic here. We are not discussing what should be said or not said during a police contact.

The thread concerns social media and the possible legal implications of what one says using social media.
 
I'm sure many here might recall the case of a certain East Coast police officer who cost his city millions following a bad use of force ... when it came out during the proceedings that the officer had posted to his (IIRC) MySpace or Facebook page that everything he learned about using force came from ... the movie "Training Day."

I am personally familiar with one case where an officer got in trouble with his employer due to something he'd posted on Facebook.

As a private citizen, I'd post NOTHING that could possibly be used during a criminal trial or civil proceedings.
 
You might want to visit my recent started thread on the last ProArms Podcast covering the Spencer Newcomb Case.

The deceased had 188 text messages between himself and a(?) neighbor regarding luring Newcomb out and assassinating him.

I stated in the original post that the 188 text messages were not allowed into evidence, but a certain number of them may have been (30?) - the recording of Newcomb's presentation was not that good, and I was listening in a noisy environment.

Anyone interested in SD law (and shouldn't we all be?) might do well to download the ProArms Podcast MP3 and save / listen.
 
basicblur said:
...The deceased had 188 text messages between himself and a(?) neighbor regarding luring Newcomb out and assassinating him.

I stated in the original post that the 188 text messages were not allowed into evidence,...
Click to expand...
That's probably because they were the out of court statements of the decedent, i. e., the guy the defendant was charged for using force against. There are different rules that apply to out of court statement of the person against whom force was alleged to have been used, and in general it's fairly rare to get such into evidence.

On the other hand, out of court statements, like social media postings, of the defendant can come into evidence fairly easily.
 
Frank Ettin may correct me on this, but IIRC it is NOT necessary to make a threat against a specific individual to be found guilty of murder if you kill someone. If you post something like, "The next time some creep hassles me I am going to shoot the &^%$%." could certainly be taken as proof of intent to kill if you do shoot a "creep."

It may not be true, but I was told of a case where a man ran over a child with his truck. It might have been an accident, but the charge was made murder when the prosecutor saw that the truck had "Exterminator" and "Kill them all" painted on it. (He did not work for Orkin.)

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Lawyers Debate Shooting..Self Defense or Second Degree Murder?
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
Aguila Blanca
A
E
  • Locked
Old study on police shootings, interesting implication for civilian SD
Replies
17
Views
822
Rexster
Rexster
C
  • Locked
Always shoot to kill?
2 3 4 5
Replies
116
Views
5K
Art Eatman
A
K
  • Locked
Opinions on claiming temporary hearing loss after SD shooting - pros/cons?
Replies
14
Views
785
HankB
H
G
  • Locked
shoot center mass
2 3
Replies
64
Views
2K
Kleanbore
K
Back
Top