Frank Ettin
Administrator
Whether or not you acted lawfully will be determined by others after the fact and considering all factors, including the type of weapon you used. If the matter goes to a trial jury, you can expect your legal expenses to run between $50,000.00 and $150,000.00, or perhaps even more. Those will be your costs whether you are convicted or acquitted.Andrew Wiggin said:...it is extremely unlikely that you will be convicted if you act lawfully, even if you use a machine gun.....
So says a non-lawyer. Let's see what an actual lawyer, Andrew Branca, has to say on the issue:Andrew Wiggin said:...Don't ever talk to cops....
- (emphasis in original)
...The “say nothing until lawyer” advice is based on the reality that anything you say to police can and may be used against you. It’s certainly true that the only 100% certain way to avoid saying anything incriminating is to say nothing at all.
Rarely mentioned, however, is that what you DON’T say can also be used against you. Sure, you have a Constitutional right to remain silent, and once you’ve asserted that right your silence cannot be used against you.
But this privilege applies post-arrest. Your silence before then can certainly be used by the Prosecution to infer guilt—an innocent person would have mentioned self-defense at the time, they’ll argue, and the fact that you did not do so suggests you only fabricated your story of self-defense after the fact to avoid criminal liability....
- (emphasis in original)
The 911 Call: Be the Complainant, Not the Respondent
A huge problem for Michael Dunn in his claim of self-defense was the considerable consciousness of guilt evidence he provided to prosecutors. In particular, his flight from the scene well beyond the need to secure his safety and his failure to ever report the shooting to law enforcement before he was arrested at gun point on a murder warrant. This conduct was far more consistent with the behavior of someone who believed he’d “gotten away with it,” than it was with the behavior who believed they’d acted in lawful self-defense. This was especially damaging given that the only evidence of self-defense came from Dunn’s own testimony in court....
- (emphasis in original)
...Let’s assume for purposes of this post, then, that you buy into the value of being the complainant rather than the respondent, and you therefore are the first to call 911.
Taking the “say nothing until I talk to my lawyer” advice literally, exactly what are you going to say when the dispatcher answers your call? “I will say nothing until I’ve spoken to my attorney.” Really? When they ask “what’s your emergency?” surely that statement can’t be your reply. Rather, you’ll necessarily provide some description of what’s happened and the location to which you’re asking law enforcement (and ambulance) be sent.
So, you’re ALREADY speaking with the police. And as long as you’re doing so, my advice is to get your claim of self-defense into the evidentiary record as soon as possible. You were attacked, you were in fear for your life, you were forced to act in self-defense. Of course, all of this will be recorded, and that recording will be admissible in court. As a result, the jury will get to hear your claim of self-defense in your own words and voice, with all the stress of the moment that such an event necessarily brings with it....
No one has claimed that. What we are challenging is your glib, fatuous dismissal of the possible legal implications of using certain weapons in self defense.Andrew Wiggin said:...The argument is that using a scary gun could land a person in jail....
The reality is that you simply don't have the professional qualifications to responsibly opine on such matters, and the issues are more complex than you guess.
There may indeed be practical reasons to use of a suppressor on a home defense gun, for example. But you don't understand the legal issues, nor do you have the education, training, and professional experience to actually have the "clue" as to such matters which you, yourself, have told us in necessary to make an opinion on such things meaningful.