Welcome to Aftermath, a portion of our First Line email newsletter where Attorney Anthony L. DeWitt walks you through a real-life self-defense incident and shares his key takeaways.
A 27-year-old man suffered a gunshot wound to his knee while attempting robbery in Nashville, Tennessee parking lot. He approached a car, brandishing a gun, and demanded packages from the occupants. As the passenger complied, the other occupant retrieved his own firearm and exited the vehicle. After the assailant fired a shot, the defender responded by shooting him in the knee. The assailant dropped his weapon, and his accomplice fled the scene in their vehicle, leaving him to hobble away. Police apprehended him shortly thereafter.
What are the potential risks and legal implications of leaving a place of safety during an armed confrontation? What training should concealed carriers seek to better assess when to engage a threat versus when to retreat safely?
This blows my mind thinking about it. Where did the accomplice come from? Did the assailant flea in his car or did he hop away? What happened to the occupants of the car?
As soon as the thug brandished a gun, it ceased to be a property crime.
Having said that, if it were up to me and I could safely retreat and find cover, the soccer mom van I’m driving is theirs. This is my preferred option particularly if I’m not the only one in the car when carjacked.
Hard to tell from the limited details if the assailant fired a shot upon seeing the defender retrieve a gun.
The defender did not get hit either because he found cover or due to the thug’s accuracy issues.
If the thug has already brandished his gun, there isn’t time to seek cover for both. At that point, you have already been threatened with death or great bodily harm. To me it is time to fight because you don’t know what is in his mind. You can’t retreat in any meaningful way because the guy is within 6 to 8 feet from you. The only possibility (in my mind) is for the driver to get out of the car and behind a wheel or the engine. That would give him some cover/concealment. The other passenger is left in his car seat because that is where the robber is. There is no retreat for him because the robber has his gun in hand at all times. I don’t know if the defender waited until the assailant fired a shot or he didn’t have a shot until that time but as long as he fired when he had the shot, he’s good to go. I probably would have fired until he was downed.
Potential risks and legal implications: For who: the victims or the robbers?
Training: Some type of close quarters defense training. Situational awareness.
There was not a place of safety in this situation. The BG already had his weapon out and was threatening all occupants of the vehicle. The way the story reads, we can only assume the driver exited the vehicle to confront the BG. Have to wonder what BG was focusing on while a full sized human got out of the vehicle and closed distance.
With just the description of “a parking lot” it is impossible to relate what should have or could have been done. The BG already has the drop on you and your passenger. In my case that passenger would most likely be my Wife. If he had the weapon on her, I would do everything in my power to not aggravate the situation, to keep her safe. “Here is my stuff. GO AWAY. PLEASE.”
Alone, the situation becomes very fluid and takes on a whole different level of FAFO.
Ok, here is where the legal problems would start. Shots were fired from both people. BG shoots at defender, defender shoots at BG, hitting him the knee. How far apart were they? Was the BG behind cover? Was the defender behind cover? Did the defender fire a reflex shot, shooting wildly, after having been shot at?
Every class I have attended, the instructors are adamant about center mass. Bigger target for a high stress situation. Shoot them, put them down, and DO NOT offer assistance to stop the bleeding. He tried to kill you, and you returned fire trying to kill him. Why save his life so he can sue you back into the stone age for hurting him?
We can give our opinions of how we would handle this situation, but not having been there, not seeing with our own eyes what REALLY went down, we cannot for certain say exactly what we would have done.
One possibility not mentioned is the driver could start the car and drive away, though this has to be evaluated by the driver at the time of the threat. If the car was already running, I’d weigh the opportunity to drive off among my other options.
I don’t see any legal problems for the defender. To me, it does not matter which one shot first. The BG came to the car with a gun in hand. After that, it is response time, no matter what response you take. Why would it matter if either or both were behind cover? Or how far apart they were. Give him everything and hope he doesn’t shoot or do everything you can to put him down him first. I would bet the BG was focusing on the guy getting out of the car with a gun in hand. True, the GG didn’t aim very well but he and his passenger walked away. The BG sounds like he had a terrible limp.
I understand that completely but if he doesn’t go away, what do you do then? She wasn’t safe as soon as the BG came to the car. If I can’t trust him the first time, I can’t trust him the second time when I tell him to go away.
During my safety class to get the carry permit, when asked “where do you aim if you need to defend yourself”, i was apparently wrong when i said center mass… he said “no, you always aim for the throat or face”
The only thing I have a problem with driving away is that it takes your attention off of someone standing by your car with a gun. He can still shoot at you but are you able to defend if you are trying to drive away. I say the probability of you being shot is higher than his is.
Until we receive the USCCA email with more details, it’s hard to tell if it was a viable option.
It mentioned the passenger complied with the thug while the “other occupant” (the driver?) retrieved his firearm—did he just endanger the passenger?
He could have but what is a BG going to concentrate on. I think they will concentrate more on the movement and the gun because that poses more of a threat to them than someone handing them packages. It will always be a crap shoot but details we know so far indicate the driver took the largest part of the risk and it turned out in his favor. Therefore, it had to be a viable option. Maybe not the best but viable!
Why do we have companies like Delta Defense to protect us? For situations JUST LIKE THIS!! Nothing in the world can prevent the BG from trying to take legal action against the GG for causing a permanent, and probably very painful, limp. How many times have we heard stories of the BG getting injured while breaking into a house, suing the homeowner and WINNING? How many times?
A good lawyer for the BG can take a defending GG apart in court, make it look like he was out to cause his client, the BG, physical damage. The lawyer can take the situation, the situation his client created, and claim the GG was psychologically impaired, unable to operate his weapon effectively.
No legal problems for the defender? I beg to differ.
If he doesn’t take the offering, he wasn’t there just to rob someone. He was there to do bodily damage. My life and the life of my Wife would be VOID at this point. If this is the case, it’s time to fight like the third monkey boarding the Arc and it’s starting to rain.
You have a point for states outside of where I live. While our state has the Castle Doctrine and stand your ground laws, it also has a little something else. No civil suits for a lawful shooting. I like the fact NC has done that. Keeps the criminals from getting rich because their crime didn’t work out like they thought it would.
Unfortunately for most of us, we do not live in NC.
Here in Texas, we do have Castle Doctrine and stand your ground laws in place, but I can still get sued for ventilating “Little Johnny” if he breaks into my house brandishing a weapon because he needs to steal my TV, so he can go buy a new pair of sneakers, so he can go to school. Oh, he was such a good boy. Always helped his Grandmother…blah, blah, blah…
Legislation is in the works to get this mockery of justice eliminated.
