Criteria for Self-Defense

A recent shooting involving a Taxi Driver and robber prompted a local TV station to explain what the criteria is for the use of lethal force.

How do you think they did?


Not toooo bad. I totally disagree with one thing; it is the prosecutors job to prove you acted illegally, it your job to prove your innocence. Obviously, we need to be prepared to articulate our innocence, but, the job lies at the feet of the state to prove criminal activity. Due process and all.


I agree with @45IPAC, the prosecutors have to prove your guilt. If involved in a self defense situation, other than reporting it via 911 keep your mouth shut! Only speak to your attorney.

Keeping your mouth shut includes not engaging in what appears to be casual conversation with responding officer. If the officer sneezes don’t offer up a god bless or any other salutation. Keep the lips zipped.


Thank you @Dawn for sharing, very educational.

1 Like

Agreeing with @45IPAC too. I’d be interested in hearing what they will be teaching at the seminars.

1 Like

That distinction really depends on the state you live in.

Here in Texas as well as FL there is a true resumption of innocence in that as long as the initial investigation shows your claim of self defense to be supported you cannot be indicted. In FL, you can’t even be arrested if the initial investigation supports the claim of SD.

A quick review of IN self defense law leads me to believe that Indiana is probably the same way specifically with this:

if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.

The way that reads, it would be up to the prosecutor to prove you acted unlawfully rather than for you to prove that you did.

It’s admittedly a fine distinction.

1 Like

As for the story I’d probably give her a C. Her bias is fairly well hidden but creeps out in a few places.

I really dislike her final statement. When in doubt try to just hold them at gun point while calling and awaiting police. I’d rather have to defend that
option excluded and end up assaulted or worse while locating and dialing my phone or waiting on a dispatcher to connect me with someone else.


That’s where I noticed her agenda. She was subtly pushing the red flag thought processes of disregarding due process.