What does "Reasonable Force" mean to you?

You left that part out, your paragraph states at the end that your client chased after 1 person and shot 6 rounds.

2 Likes

I must clarify,
“I’m guessing from your post, since you mentioned six shots fired on one of the assailants that it was an issue.
However, IMO number of shots fired, as is, is not an indicator of excessive response.

2 Likes

Lay out the whole story please.

2 Likes

i agree with the responses and to figure neighbor hood what other disadvantages against him fear of life is just that im a pretty big dude but put in that same situation would have done the same one on one is bad enough but 4 on one its clearly self defense

2 Likes

Yes, believe it or not, all 6 shots hit the assailant. This and the fact that my client followed them while shooting is the where the problem rises. By the way this is all on video obtained the surveillance cameras.

2 Likes

I will layout the entire story when the case is finished. I am sorry for being vague, but I am doing it purposefully to sense the general opinion of the audience when it comes to “reasonable force.”

3 Likes

Since you are using us as sort of a focus group, I guess my initial question should have been, “What are the complete facts of the case as you know them to date?” Because your surgical additions to the story is teaching us something about our knee jerk reactions and hypothetical responses.

4 Likes

Even if deadly force was used, one cannot shoot escaping attacker.
But you mentioned rather severe injury, shattered eye socket. Was your client able to see at the moment? Perhaps he could see vague outline of his attacker, but couldnt tell the direction threat was moving.

2 Likes

Ok, so, he was still being chased by four others and only chased and shot one 6 times? If the other four were still a threat then why didn’t he engage them?
Correct me if I’m wrong.

2 Likes

At the exact same time he is hit in the head with the bottle, he starts firing at the person directly in front of him. Everyone starts to run and the client follows discharging all 6 rounds. Afterwards he returns to his car and calls 9-11

2 Likes

ok that is a issue threat was over leaving because of gun fire end of threat him pursuing them to me sounds more like anger than fear

4 Likes

So, 6 rounds didn’t do it? He started firing at one of the guys in front of him. But then he ran after them emptying his gun (6 rounds). So, how was the guy in front of him able to run having initially been shot, and how many rounds did he receive in total? Was there a reload somewhere? Or was the aggressor hit once initially and then after running receive the other 5 rounds? which would probably mean he shot him in the back.

1 Like

im confused to there were 5 or 6 shots at the car then shot 6 more times chasing them something is missing in this equation

1 Like

I feel…I feel like…I feel like Sherlock Holmes right now. Watson, who dun it? Was it professor Peaks in the kitchen with a revolver? Or was it Mrs. Kettles in the living room with a butcher knife? Hmmm…

1 Like

I’m still just seeing a guy who chased down and emptied his gun into a fleeing unarmed person

4 Likes

Tough to be either
one of the 12, or
the one judged by 12
in this case

I suspect being one of the 12 would be a lot easier with video

2 Likes

yeah once the threat is over if you were in fear for your life you wouldn’t pursue them and lay down fire something don’t add up

4 Likes

My 2 cents.
I personally would think that 2-3-4 on one would be considered a viable threat to ones health and safety. I would think that attacking someone with a weapon that could cause death or serious injury (a glass bottle) would warrant force that was known to cause death or serious injury. I would think that pursuit and entering the guys car would define proximity to cause injury. But what do I know, I’m a right wing thinker living in Utah.

1 Like

I am not an attorney, but I have always had a keen interest in the law. In your situation, you ask about “reasonable force”, but then state that the judge ruled that the use of force was “excessive”. These seem to be two different things. Reasonableness can be defined by what a reasonable person would do in the same situation. Did the attackers have weapons? Was the defendant an older or weaker person who feared great bodily harm from four attackers? Would a reasonable person have felt the same way? From the way you have described it, I can imagine that the judge ruled that the force was excessive because he shot someone six times. The answer to that is simply, “Your honor, I fired my weapon only until they were no longer a threat to me. It unfortunately took six shots to stop the attack.”

2 Likes