I got to thinking: only in Hollywood do gunshot victims not bleed.
If there comes a need to shoot an attacker, and his blood gets on you, and he is either killed or taken into custody alive, do you have any legal right to order tests on his blood to see if you were exposed to any infectious diseases?
And I'm not talking about someone sopping up the blood that's on the floor. I'm saying, is there a precedent or law that establishes your right to have a judge ORDER blood to be drawn from him, in hospital, for the purpose of checking what you've been exposed to? I'm talking about where you acted in justified self defense.
Anyone know?
If there comes a need to shoot an attacker, and his blood gets on you, and he is either killed or taken into custody alive, do you have any legal right to order tests on his blood to see if you were exposed to any infectious diseases?
And I'm not talking about someone sopping up the blood that's on the floor. I'm saying, is there a precedent or law that establishes your right to have a judge ORDER blood to be drawn from him, in hospital, for the purpose of checking what you've been exposed to? I'm talking about where you acted in justified self defense.
Anyone know?