We don’t know yet what order the events occurred. Shooter could be really fast on the draw. And all of it was after the deceased struck the shooter in the face.Originally Posted by Mystery
We don’t know yet what order the events occurred. Shooter could be really fast on the draw. And all of it was after the deceased struck the shooter in the face.
Note: The following is my take on the OC/lethal force issue, not commentary on this particular case.It’s worth learning about. I was surprised when we were taught that but it makes sense and it’s well within Constitutional limits on force.
Were you on a jury I’d hope you’d vote in accordance with the law and jury instructions instead of what feels right based on watching a video.
The training I received on this question has been a little more nuanced than it would have been if it had presented a black and white, “if A, then B” rule to follow.
If you are a uniformed police officer openly carrying a handgun, and you know from experience that OC spray has a debilitating effect on you, then someone who attacks you with OC spray may well be posing a deadly threat, since a gun (yours) is in play, the attacker knows a gun is in play, and you will shortly lose some of your ability to keep it. This may be the easiest scenario in which to articulate the reasonableness of a deadly force response.
However, if you are in plainclothes (whatever your role is) and someone attacks you with OC spray, not knowing that you have a concealed firearm, it may be harder to articulate a deadly threat, even if you know from experience that OC spray has a debilitating effect on you.
For most people, OC alone is not likely to cause death or serious bodily injury. It can certainly be used as a precursor to deadly force, or to soften the victim and make him or her more vulnerable to kidnapping, etc., but the mere use of OC spray doesn’t necessarily herald additional violence meriting a deadly force response. Articulation is key.
The text on his tattoo is SUB.MISSION and appears connected to a music business of the same name. SUB.MISSION openly supports and fundraises for ANTIFA / BLM causes on their social media. They're also affiliated with various artists who openly support ANTIFA / BLM causes.
I don't understand your focus on making the Space Invader / ANTIFA connection? That connection exists. You can find images of ANTIFA propaganda with the exact Space Invader character featured on the shooters tattoo.
As previously mentioned there's a book titled Space Invaders - Radical Geographies of Protest.
Here are the chapter contents:
1. Radical Geographies of Protest: Spatial Strategies, Sites of Intervention and Scholar Activism
2. Know Your Place: Barricades, Rooftops and Being Steadfast
3. Make Some Space: Camps, Commons and Occupations
4. Stay Mobile: Packs and Swarms, Flash Mobs and Hacktivism
5. Wage Wars of Words: Testimonies, Communiqués and Culture Jamming
6. Extend Your Reach: Convergences, Conferences and Caravans
7. Feel Out of Place: Ethical Spectacles, Zaps and Guerrilla Performances
8. Space Invaders: Power, Politics and Protest
This book is published by Pluto Press in the UK which is a self described radical political publishing house established in 1969.
Additionally, there are writings on the interwebz that include the words Space Invaders, Trump, and BLM in the same document.
Right. If the use of OC was preceded by “Get away from me, you jerk! Leave me alone!” from the user, it would be hard to justify a deadly force response.
As of now, there is not enough context or content in the video to know what happened, nor why. One can speculate, but until more video and facts are available this is really just a shitty situation and should be an example to the audience here at P-F. That example is to avoid these type of events (period).
My UOF instructors were more nuanced - it’s not a blanket license to shoot - as it’s going to be hard to justify stitching up a little old lady with a lipstick sized CS spray from 20 feet away when you a couple of other officers as backup with you, but your point stands. One reason why we are sprayed in training is so you can articulate why you knew you needed to use force when CS was used or about to be used on you. You can say that you have first-hand experience with just how debilitating the spray is. (Of course, you are also taught you can fight through the effects of the spray and still function. We had to run this little maze/obstacle course right after being sprayed.)
This is were the defense counsel earns some of its money, probably with a UOF expert witness to explain to the jury why getting slapped and bear sprayed by 270 lb (possibly armed) biker necessitated deadly force.
This is what I found that some were referring too...
Trump.Why not W. “I’m not saying it was Bush’s fault but he sure didn’t do anything to stop it. “
In the P-F basket of deplorables.
Assuming the shooter was a lawfully contracted private security guard, which is doubtful, the same laws that apply to citizens apply to private security. We can use the elements of self defense Andrew Branca discusses to analyze the use of force decision. They are Innocence, Imminence, Proportionality, Avoidance, and Reasonableness. Innocence has to do with who is the aggressor. I have not seen a video of the actual incident going down, so I do not know how it started. On the face of it, OC spray vs. gun does not hold muster at passing the elements of self defense. If any one of the elements is not present, the justification for self defense is lacking for a private citizen. Right off the bat, using deadly force against someone merely OC spraying you does not appear to be a proportional use of force. It is not only a matter of lethal vs. less lethal force. I have been both tazed and pepper sprayed. As a part of training when getting pepper sprayed, you usually have to show you can work through problems, fight through it, apply handcuffs, possibly fire marking cartridges etc. Pepper spray is annoying, but easy to fight through. Getting tazed on the other hand is entirely different. If it weren't for the 2 guys on each side of me, I would have face planted and been taken out of the fight for the 5 seconds of fun after getting tazed. Pepper spray me though and that would just piss me off. Yes, my eyes wanted to close shut and it was an annoying pain, but I could see well enough to fight. Out of my class, I was affected worse than most, so it was not a case of it having not much of an effect on me, like on some people.
If someone is deploying OC spray on you, it would be difficult at best to argue your life is in imminence risk of death or serious bodily injury. I think most people (i.e. jurors) would not consider gun vs. OC spray to be a reasonable use of force. Innocence and Avoidance are also questionable in this case, but I do not have enough information. Thus, with the limited information available, if it were a case of gun vs. OC spray, the incident appears to fail multiple elements for a claim of a citizens justified use of deadly force (i.e. shooting). In fact, it may be the case that it fails every single element.
How well the two participants guns were concealed may be an issue here. If you look at the photo in post number two it appears a deceased was wearing a very poorly concealed handgun under his vest in some type of range or duty type holster with the muzzle sticking out under the hem. In other words he was visibly armed with a handgun despite having a vest over the top half of it as a sort of “gun Burka.”
A more likely argument for the defense would be a mistake of fact argument: The shooter saw the deceased’s poorly concealed gun, the deceased slapped the shooter hard enough to knock off his hat and glasses and reached for his waistband. On seeing the armed guy who just slapped him reaching for his waistband, the shooter assumed the deceased was reaching for his gun but pulled OC instead. The argument being the shooter drew and fired in response to a perceived handgun draw by the deceased and, action generally bearing reaction, was unable to perceive and adjust to the fact OC came out instead of a gun.
Now, I’m not saying that’s what happened, it is entirely possible the shooter just lost his shit and blasted this guy out of sheer petulance but It is the argument a good defense attorney or defense expert witness would make.
Last edited by HCM; 10-11-2020 at 07:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
