What to do if no shots fired?

[Friar Whently]

So I hate to post a scenario, but this is something that I've been wondering about and I can't find a thread on this specific topic.

Say you were in a situation where the use of deadly force was completely justified (let's say the BG has a knife or other weapon) and you drew your carry gun with every intention to use it. As you draw, the BG sees it and turns tail and runs off and the situation is over with no shots fired.

Now what? Re-holster, leave the scene and pretend nothing happened, or call the police? Legally speaking, you should call the police and report the incident. But what do you tell them? Do you tell them you drew your gun and the BG ran off? If you didn't fire it, then they may assume you weren't justified in pulling it in the first place, and if you happen to be talking to police face-to-face, they may try to charge you for brandishing or some such nonsense. I suppose you could leave the scene, call, describe the situation but give them no personal information. Do you not mention the gun? It would sound pretty strange that you were able to make an armed assailant think twice without being armed yourself. Do you try to be vague about what happened?

I guess my question boils down to this: what do you tell police so you don't get legally screwed after a no-shots-fired situation?

 

[Riceman98]

This happened recently in salt lake city. The man was stabing people with a knife and a guy pulled a gun but did not shoot him.

http://www.abc4.com/content/news/to...-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspx

 

[Kleanbore]

Say you were in a situation where the use of deadly force was completely justified (let's say the BG has a knife or other weapon) and you drew your carry gun with every intention to use it. As you draw, the BG sees it and turns tail and runs off and the situation is over with no shots fired.

Now what?

You want to be the first to call.

Otherwise, someone may report you first, putting you on the defensive and putting you at risk of being charged.

You also want the police looking for your assailants as soon as possible.

You tell them what happened and describe the attackers.

 

[Owen Sparks]

If the police were there and asked you what happened you would not legally be required to talk to them. You could use your right to remain silent. So why should you be required to call them on the phone and report yourself if there is a chance that they might charge you with a crime? Take the Fith and do not testify against yourself if there are no witnesses.

 

[ec4321]

If the police were there and asked you what happened you would not legally be required to talk to them. You could use your right to remain silent. So why should you be required to call them on the phone and report yourself if there is a chance that they might charge you with a crime? Take the Fith and do not testify against yourself if there are no witnesses.

You don't know there are no witnesses, for one, the guy who ran off who you drew on is a witness and could report you for brandishing.

If you scurry off and try to hide it, the police might believe him. He may call them to try to head you off at the pass assuming you're going to report him for attacking him.


That's a dangerous game.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Owen Sparks: So why should you be required to call them on the phone and report yourself if there is a chance that they might charge you with a crime? Take the Fith and do not testify against yourself if there are no witnesses.

Would you rather be listed as the complainant or as the suspect?

There are witnesses--the people whom you should report could just as easily report you. They can describe you and your firearm and claim that you assaulted them.

And how about that lady walking her dog? The man looking out from his window?

Be the first.

Your failure to report the incident could easily be interpreted as an indication of guilt.

 

[MedWheeler]

Call it in. Say you want to report that an attempted or possible attempted (insert crime here) has occurred and that you displayed a firearm in personal defense. Continue from there. You do indeed want to call it in before someone else, either a witness who does not understand what happened, or the suspect himself, does.

 

[Sam1911]

You just saw a clearly violent criminal in your area, and were threatened with a deadly weapon (which is a felony, itself). Make the call. You may save your own freedom, and you may help save the life of someone else, too.

 

[ScottieG59]

I read of a case where the man defending himself was not able to call first due to an unreliable mobile phone. The attackers called 911 first and the man defending himself was arrested as the attacker. Eventually, the truth came out but is was a long painful ordeal.

Mas Ayoob you need to win the race to call 911. The first caller wins.

 

[JohnKSa]

There are a couple of ways to look at it.

If deadly force was justified (as stated in the OP) then you witnessed a felony. Failing to report a felony is generally a crime.

The second perspective, as already mentioned, is that you don't want to be the one the police are called about, you want to be the one doing the calling. After all, that's the normal response of someone who's just been the victim of an attempted crime.

 

[mljdeckard]

I started a thread about this once. If the gun comes out, I'm calling the police, for all of the reasons Kleanbore said. If this guy is out there still, there may be another related incident, and the police could use the context. It is also entirely possible that if you draw, and they guy runs away and calls the police, YOU will be the one getting proned out.

 

[Frank Ettin]

If the police were there and asked you what happened you would not legally be required to talk to them. You could use your right to remain silent. So why should you be required to call them on the phone and report yourself if there is a chance that they might charge you with a crime? Take the Fith and do not testify against yourself if there are no witnesses.

As others have said, this is a truly lousy idea.

Among other things, while you're going on about your business, the guy who attacked you is on the telephone to the police giving them a description of the nut case who just threatened him with a gun.

The first to report will usually be treated as the victim.

 

[Spats McGee]

1) Be the first to call, if possible. I'd rather be listed as "Complainant" than "Suspect.

2) You may be charged with brandishing (or whatever it's called in your state), regardless of whether you call first or second. However, being first to call gives you the opportunity to give your side of the story first.

3) Not calling at all may make the prosecutor or the jury suspicious of your story. If you're going to claim that you pulled the gun in self-defense, you're going to need to establish grounds. Most likely, that's going to mean testifying at trial. Here's one possible scenario that you don't really want at your brandishing trial:

Prosecuting Attorney: So it's your claim that you were attacked, right?
You: Yes.
PA: Attacked by a violent man with a knife, right?
You: Yes.
PA: And it's your claim that you felt that your life was in imminent danger, right?
You: Yes.
PA: Grave danger?
You: Yes.
PA: And it's your claim that your life was in such danger that you had to draw your gun to defend yourself, right?
You: Yes.
PA: You claim that you had no other alternatives, right?
You: Yes.
PA: But you didn't think that it was serious enough to call the police, did you?
You: Erm . . .

 

[Snag]

Like everybody else said be the first to call, it makes a huge difference. Long story short.....long time ago I was involved in an altercation where the other guy pulled a knife and cut my throat. In response I produced a pistol and fired off two rounds into the ground near the gentleman's feet, just to get him as far away from me as possible. He got to the phone before me and needless to say all of a sudden I was the bad guy. Once all the details came out everything was fine but for a bit there, just cause I didn't make that first call, it wasn't looking good.

 

[smalls]

I think it depends on the situation. If someone was truly attacking you, and had intent to end your life, I highly doubt they are the kind of person who is going to call the police.

I mean, how many gang vs. gang deaths are there, that only get reported by witnesses? Criminals don't call the police. They certainly don't want any part of an investigation.

Now, if there were witnesses, you kind of have to, otherwise one of them will (or already has) called the police. But at least then you'll hopefully have someone that saw the whole thing, and can point you out as the good guy

 

[Frank Ettin]

...If someone was truly attacking you, and had intent to end your life, I highly doubt they are the kind of person who is going to call the police...

Maybe or maybe not. How sure are you? And maybe he wasn't necessarily planning to kill you -- only rob you. And he might think it would be fun to make a call and cause you some grief.

 

[BADUNAME37]

Yes, I say call it in.
However, IMO, do not discuss anything with the police before speaking to an attorney.

What you say will be used against you in a court of law.

When they tell you that, they are not joking!
They WILL use what you say against you.

 

[Sam1911]

Yes, I say call it in.
However, IMO, do not discuss anything with the police before speaking to an attorney.

So, you'd call your attorney first and then call the police? (Remember, in that phone call, you are talking to the police. That's legally admissible testimony.) There are SOME things you can and probably should say to the cops right away (to include the immediate phone call) before your attorney arrives on scene.

"Hello, 911? Yes, I was just attacked by a man with a knife at the corner of 1st and 3rd streets. I was afraid for my life. I drew my gun and he ran away. Please send officers here right away. I'd like to give his description and sign a complaint. He's still in the area and armed. I'll go wait for the officers in the restaurant across the street. I'm a middle adged Indian man wearing a sport coat and a bowler hat." (Or something like that.)

 

[smalls]

Maybe or maybe not. How sure are you? And maybe he wasn't necessarily planning to kill you -- only rob you. And he might think it would be fun to make a call and cause you some grief.

Say this happened while I'm walking my dog at night. How well can he identify me? How well can I identify him? If I probably can't tell the officer's what he looked like, I bet he can't tell them what I look like.

Plain daylight? Someone else probably saw it, too.

 

[Sam1911]

Say this happened while I'm walking my dog at night. How well can he identify me? How well can I identify him? If I probably can't tell the officer's what he looked like, I bet he can't tell them what I look like.

You'd both have some idea of what the other looked like or at least what kind of clothes he had on, and depending on response time, the police may arrive quickly enough to search for this guy.

 

[MedWheeler]

Say this happened while I'm walking my dog at night. How well can he identify me? How well can I identify him? If I probably can't tell the officer's what he looked like, I bet he can't tell them what I look like.

So, is it considered wrong in Michigan to report an attempted forcible felony if you cannot provide a good description?

 

[smalls]

No, and you missed the point, but in the OP he stated :

If you didn't fire it, then they may assume you weren't justified in pulling it in the first place, and if you happen to be talking to police face-to-face, they may try to charge you for brandishing or some such nonsense. I suppose you could leave the scene, call, describe the situation but give them no personal information. Do you not mention the gun?

This is how I can imagine the conversation with officers going:
"The man tried attacking me, so I drew, he's wearing (whatever), and he ran that way"
"So how do you know he was going to attack you? Maybe he was just a jogger?"

And I had already admitted to drawing as an affirmative defense, and they arrest me for brandishing.

Sam, I called the police to report my neighbor beating the hell out of his wife, and throwing her down the stairs. It took them 15-20 minutes to respond. With no ambulance.

 

[Sam1911]

And I had already admitted to drawing as an affirmative defense, and they arrest me for brandishing.

But then, the ONLY piece of evidence regarding that affirmative defense is your statement. They have no evidence at all that conflicts with your story, so it would be a little difficult to refute your affirmative defense. They can't just say, "well, we don't believe you, so case closed, guilty of brandishing." Absent any firm, concrete reason to know you're lying they pretty much have to take your word for it.

 

[MedWheeler]

Smalls, this is the OP opening line.

Say you were in a situation where the use of deadly force was completely justified (let's say the BG has a knife or other weapon) and you drew your carry gun with every intention to use it.

Now, this assumes you have already determined that he was not "just a jogger." So, when asked how you knew attack was his intent, you respond accordingly. If you did not know attack was his intent, why did you draw?

 

[Sam1911]

So, when asked how you knew attack was his intent, you respond accordingly.

Right, and if that's the only evidense and/or testimony they have, they have nothing with which to refute your claim. Even if they don't believe you AT ALL, they'd have to come up with something concrete to disprove your claim or you wouldn't even be likely to be charged.