liability

[flaps]

hypothetically, i wake up at 3:00 am and hear people in the the living room. i grab my m1 carbine with 20 round mag. i go to the living room, turn on the light and these 2 big guys who broke in act like they wanna hurt me. so i shoot and kill them (frontal body shots) . turns out they are not armed.
i call the cops.
..
what i wanna know is.. am i liable for mansalughter or some shit?
(i live in new york)

 

[scoolbubba]

New York Penal Code, sec 35.20:

3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other person when he reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such burglary

Reading that seems like no, but that doesn't preclude civil repercussions. New York isn't Texas, if you smell what I'm stepping in.

 

[Rocketman]

Best answer is it depends on the state you live in. I believe I'm correct in saying that in NC today, 09/14/2011, you could possibly be sued in civil court for the actions you took, even if you followed the law. As of 12/01/2011, when NC's new castle doctrine law takes effect you would be immune to a civil lawsuit as long as you followed the law. (and don't cap a LEO in the process)

(b) A person who uses force as permitted by this section is justified in using such force and is immune from civil or criminal liability for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer who was lawfully acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer in the lawful performance of his or her official duties."

He's another good question....

What do you say to the LEO that responds to your legal shoot?

With tremendous respect to all LEO's what I say is:

"officer my life was in imminent danger and I was forced to defend myself. I'm sure you understand that this is a very serious matter and with respect, I'm don't intend to say anything else until I talk to my attorney"

Then I shut up....period. I'm very interested in hearing from the AW members that have LEO experience comment on this......

 

[CAMike]

Rocketman is spot on.

No matter what state you live in make your fear for you life statement and tell them that you'll be more than happy to make a statement after you speak to your attorney. As you can imagine this was a very traumatic experience and I need some time to gather my thoughts and composure. STOP Talking at that point.

Fairly long but interesting to see the policeman AND the attorney discussing this relevant topic.

"GOOD" Free Legal Advice Here:

 

[OnTopTime]

I find it interesting that the New York statute allows the use of deadly force in a situation where one doesn't have to fear that he is in imminent danger himself; i.e. deadly force may legally be used for no other reason than to stop the burglary in the domocile.

I would have thought that New York's law in this regard would be more restrictive.

 

[LFDtoUSMC]

CAMike beat me to it...

I like the first quote of the detective, "Everything he just said is true."

 

[wink]

Regardless of what the law says, don't be shooting people over property crimes. You may not get charged criminally, but a lot of folks, most folks, think it a bit immoral to kill someone for taking your $1200 flat screen. Those people will be on the jury if there is a civil suit. Interesting sidebar, just today I was in a Federal District courtroom listening to a police officer defend his actions. He shot and killed a guy trying to run him over after robbing a convenience store. The questioning by the plaintiff's lawyer was classic obfuscation, bait and switch, and misrepresenting. You don't want to go through that over the value of any property in your home. You shoot someone, you had better be afraid for your life or another's

 

[wink]

Fairly long but interesting to see the policeman AND the attorney discussing this relevant topic.
...

Finally got around to watching this video. It reminded me of the differences in civil courts. So you follow the advice in this video and otherwise was involved in a righteous shooting, you don't get arrested. But if you are sued different rules apply. You will be deposed at length and the plaintiff will have months to pick it apart and find people who can make whatever you did look negligent. And just for good measure, you find out that the 5th Amendment they speak of in the video above doesn't really apply in a civil suit (there are some exceptions that rarely apply). So if you get sued you MUST be deposed under oath and later sit on the stand and answer for your actions. You can't sit there and invoke the 5th over and over like you might have seen on Law and Order. In my state, if you don't answer, your silence is presumed to reflect negatively on you. In over 15 shooting law suits I have observed in court. I have never seen anyone dummy up. You just can't. You better be sure of what you did and be able to articulate it every way since Sunday. It will take more than repeating "I was afraid for my life." You will have to answer for everything from choice of weapon and ammunition, to lighting, warnings, training, fatigue, alternative courses of action, where you placed the front sight and why, how many times you shot, why you did or did not provide aide and much more.

 

[millsra13]

Regardless of what the law says, don't be shooting people over property crimes. You may not get charged criminally, but a lot of folks, most folks, think it a bit immoral to kill someone for taking your $1200 flat screen. Those people will be on the jury if there is a civil suit. Interesting sidebar, just today I was in a Federal District courtroom listening to a police officer defend his actions. He shot and killed a guy trying to run him over after robbing a convenience store. The questioning by the plaintiff's lawyer was classic obfuscation, bait and switch, and misrepresenting. You don't want to go through that over the value of any property in your home. You shoot someone, you had better be afraid for your life or another's

I do agree that property isn't worth someone's life, but if someone breaks into my home at night when it is obvious that people are at home (cars in the driveway), there is a good chance that they will be leaving via ambulance. I would assume that if they break into a house knowing someone is home, they might not be there just to steal shit. This is why I have a ridiculously bright tactical light on my 1911: 1st- I can make sure it is actually a bad guy and not just a family member making an un-announced visit and 2nd- It will hopefully deter them from getting shot so I don't have to answer a bunch of questions from the police and/or lawyers.

 

[flaps]

better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6

 

[wink]

I do agree that property isn't worth someone's life, but if someone breaks into my home at night when it is obvious that people are at home (cars in the driveway), there is a good chance that they will be leaving via ambulance. I would assume that if they break into a house knowing someone is home, they might not be there just to steal shit. This is why I have a ridiculously bright tactical light on my 1911: 1st- I can make sure it is actually a bad guy and not just a family member making an un-announced visit and 2nd- It will hopefully deter them from getting shot so I don't have to answer a bunch of questions from the police and/or lawyers.

A lot of assumptions there. You had better not use the "A" word when you tell anyone, especially a lawyer, why you killed the drunk neighbor that came into your home by accident or why you hadn't heard that people can go on vacation, take a super shuttle or get a ride from friend, and leave cars in the driveway. Go ahead and do what you think is right. Just be damn sure why you are doing it. Better not be based on assumptions.

 

[wink]

better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6

Unless your lack of action would not have resulted in you being carried by six. In that case, you are just tired by 12 and live with the knowledge that you killed someone over a Tivo or your wife's purse. Worse, you killed someone who wanted nothing from you but better judgment.

 

[yak52driver]

The gentleman that trained me told me to 1.) dial 911 and tell them what is going on if someone has broken in and leave the phone connection open, 2.) stay in the bedroom with my weapon and light and yell, "I am awake, I have called 911 and I have a gun", 3.) angle for a view of anyone coming down the hall. If they want to take a TV, I don't care, but if they advance down the hall after the warning they can be presumed to have harmful intent. As other here have already stated, lawyers will always try to find ways to make the homeowner and victim look negligent, but if they come down the hall in my mind they intend to hurt my family and that will not happen.

 

[wink]

The gentleman that trained me told me to 1.) dial 911 and tell them what is going on if someone has broken in and leave the phone connection open...

This is good advise. Most 911 operators will tell you to leave the line open. As it turns out, this very thing is crucial to the case I am sitting in right now. A 911 call recorded the events that happend in the background, including the shots. As we know from our experience with aircraft mishaps, eye witnesses are frequently inaccurate. Physical evidence is much better. A tape recording takes investigators and jurors right into the scene and even into your shoes. Someone says you yelled "take this you fvcking wet back" but it isn't on the tape, no sweat.

 

[feddoc]

The gentleman that trained me told me to 1.) dial 911 and tell them what is going on if someone has broken in and leave the phone connection open, 2.) stay in the bedroom with my weapon and light and yell, "I am awake, I have called 911 and I have a gun", 3.) angle for a view of anyone coming down the hall. If they want to take a TV, I don't care, but if they advance down the hall after the warning they can be presumed to have harmful intent. As other here have already stated, lawyers will always try to find ways to make the homeowner and victim look negligent, but if they come down the hall in my mind they intend to hurt my family and that will not happen.

Your number 3 is pretty much what got my first CCW in California . I told the SO that I had a lot of nice stuff and that while I would not kill someone for taking my nice stuff, (that is what insurance is for) they may not want to leave witnesses.