Don't Talk to the Cops?

[BlackHawk93]

Pretty much what my HCP instructor said, and he's a cop (or maybe retired... I wasn't clear on that). He also said that the decision to shoot should be made after answering the question of whether what you're defending is worth selling everything you own to cover legal fees for the resulting civil lawsuit. Even the worst meth-addicted bad guy may have a grieving mother/wife/brother who may decide that it'll take a few hundred thousand dollars to end their anguish.

That being said, how would I go about getting the names of a few lawyers in the Chattanooga area who are pro-carry? Sorry, Mr. Stegall, Memphis is too far away.

Why are you telling Patrick youre sorry for it being too far away? Whatever county you shoot someone in is where you will be tried, and he has gone out on a limb and offered to at least counsel you if you should happen to be involved in a SD shooting. I think that's admirable. I'm sure it would be up to him whether he wanted to take your case. Hell, Ive needed a lawyer a couple times and called a family lawyer who turned it down, so to have someone who is gun pro willing to at least counsel you is a plus in my book. I already put his info in my phone under Shooting! Thanks Patrick

Edited December 15, 2011 by BlackHawk93

[dlm37015]

they can sue you .

[JWKilgore]

Why are you telling Patrick youre sorry for it being too far away? Whatever county you shoot someone in is where you will be tried, and he has gone out on a limb and offered to at least counsel you if you should happen to be involved in a SD shooting. I think that's admirable. I'm sure it would be up to him whether he wanted to take your case. Hell, Ive needed a lawyer a couple times and called a family lawyer who turned it down, so to have someone who is gun pro willing to at least counsel you is a plus in my book. I already put his info in my phone under Shooting! Thanks Patrick

I agree that the name and number of a "pro gun" lawyer is a desirable thing to have, which is why I asked for one. I do appreciate Mr. Stegall's offer of council (I'll echo, Thanks Patrick!), and I saved his firm's information for future use. However, I live several hundred miles from Memphis and haven't been there in many years. I'd like to at least contact any potential lawyer ahead of time instead just cold-calling one after blood has been shed.

[Guest lostpass]

Well, I wouldn't do that unless I really felt that I physically needed it (heart still racing to point of blowout, dizzy whatever). If I mentally/emotionally didn't feel up to snuff to give a clear account, I'd just do the "wait till I get with a mouthpiece" thing.

Certainly don't know for sure how I'd react since I've never shot anyone, but a biker basically committed suicide by FedEx with me about 4 years ago -- got up close and personal with the body to check him out, etc.

It was most certainly a disturbing experience, but not traumatic to the point where I never felt in complete control of myself. And even though that's a situation where you figure the family would sue you automatically no matter what, I went ahead and gave a complete statement rather than ask for a personal or Fedex lawyer first. Just told the truth, and wasn't charged, fired, or sued.

One thing about telling the truth -- you don't have to remember the details of a lie.

- OS

Which is excellent advice if you're OhShoot. I'll bet, without knowing the story, that you did everything possible to avoid the accident. I'd further wager that any occasion you actually had to let some one borrow some ammo the hard way it would be pretty clear cut. I suspect that would be the case with almost everyone on this board.

Lawyers aren't interested in the best case scenario, they are interested in what they see the most of, the real world scenario. So if I'm spending my time selling oxycontin and I suffer a home invasion and blast someone in the face it is probably a good idea to hit the hospital first and to clam up. IF I've had problems with the neighbors and loud arguments and later are forced to get all stabby, probably better to shut up. Shades of gray and all.

For your basic, pretty rare, home invasion: you're eating dinner and meth heads break down your door screaming "we'll kill all of you, we'll kill all of your dogs" talking is probably no big deal.

But a lot of people carry because they are worried about a specific threat. Suppose your wife hates you. Well, of course your wife hates you. That's why people get married, so they can be around each other enough to build up a sincere loathing.

bad tangent. Suppose you carry because your ex husband is crazy. That's kind of on you for marrying a crazy person but you still have the right to defend yourself. So crazy husband comes over and wants to smack you around a bit. You shoot him sixteen times. Why sixteen? He kept getting up and waving that knife.

Even though you were within your rights the history of the relationship will make a lot for a lot of problems.

I realize that most people carry because they are worried about a random threat. Car jacking or whatever but the folks that end up shooting aren't shooting at strangers.

[AMSting]

nysos has it right

Make sure you call the police first, you want to be the first 911 call if the other guy is wounded/runs away - make sure they know you are the victim. It looks really bad if you wait around 10-15 minutes to call 911 and the other guy has already called saying YOU are the bad guy and he is the victim. Soon as you get off the phone with 911 contact a lawyer.

When police arrive: "I was scared for my life" , "I thought he was going to kill me", "I am willing to cooperate in the investigation, but I do not want to give any statements until I have legal counsel present"

Point out evidence, point out any witnesses - aside from that, don't offer up any statements as to detailed information of what happened leading up to the event. The worst thing you can do is to say absolutely nothing, evidence could be overlooked if the person you had to shoot/shoot at ditched their weapon and the investigating officers overlook it.

Massad Ayoob also suggest stating that you want to file a complaint against the other person (assuming they are just wounded/ran off).

Ayoob says you need to get out in front of the investigation. If you clam up and let others do the talking, you are leaving your freedom in someone else's hands. These may be unbiased witnesses, or they may be remaining friends of the BG. That is not to say you should blab all over the place, but you need to get the facts out right away, and provided as much information as necessary to tilt the favor in your direction. LEOs are human, and they will become biased based on their perception, no matter how professional they are. Get out in front with relevent information, make sure they know you are the good guy and this was justified, then get your lawyer.

Edited December 15, 2011 by AMSting

[z90HD]

Make sure you call the police first, you want to be the first 911 call if the other guy is wounded/runs away - make sure they know you are the victim. It looks really bad if you wait around 10-15 minutes to call 911 and the other guy has already called saying YOU are the bad guy and he is the victim. Soon as you get off the phone with 911 contact a lawyer.

When police arrive: "I was scared for my life" , "I thought he was going to kill me", "I am willing to cooperate in the investigation, but I do not want to give any statements until I have legal counsel present"

Point out evidence, point out any witnesses - aside from that, don't offer up any statements as to detailed information of what happened leading up to the event. The worst thing you can do is to say absolutely nothing, evidence could be overlooked if the person you had to shoot/shoot at ditched their weapon and the investigating officers overlook it.

Massad Ayoob also suggest stating that you want to file a complaint against the other person (assuming they are just wounded/ran off).

Yeah, pretty much word for word is what my HCP instructor told us to do in a SD situation. I keep reminding myself of this all the time cause you just never know if your gonna have to make that call. One thing he did add though is, when you call 911 ask for the police as stated above but also ask for an ambulance weather the bad guy is wounded or dead. This helps you in the event that you did provide help for the victim.

[Guest nysos]

Yeah, pretty much word for word is what my HCP instructor told us to do in a SD situation. I keep reminding myself of this all the time cause you just never know if your gonna have to make that call. One thing he did add though is, when you call 911 ask for the police as stated above but also ask for an ambulance weather the bad guy is wounded or dead. This helps you in the event that you did provide help for the victim.

It is also a good idea to try and give the other guy first aid if they are incapacitated and not a threat, but still alive. Shows remorse on your part that you weren't trying to kill someone out of cold blood and just protecting yourself. Shoot to "stop the threat" not to kill.

[Guest bkelm18]

It is also a good idea to try and give the other guy first aid if they are incapacitated and not a threat, but still alive. Shows remorse on your part that you weren't trying to kill someone out of cold blood and just protecting yourself. Shoot to "stop the threat" not to kill.

Yes give them aid. That way if you mess up they'll have something else they can sue you for.

[Guest don_m]

. . .

Ayoob says you need to get out in front of the investigation. If you clam up and let others do the talking, you are leaving your freedom in someone else's hands. These may be unbiased witnesses, or they may be remaining friends of the BG. That is not to say you should blab all over the place, but you need to get the facts out right away, and provided as much information as necessary to tilt the favor in your direction. LEOs are human, and they will become biased based on their perception, no matter how professional they are. Get out in front with relevent information, make sure they know you are the good guy and this was justified, then get your lawyer.

I was with you right up to "you need to get the facts out right away." I've spent several days in Ayoob's class and he spent a lot of time on the aftermath of a shooting. Unlike the guilty criminal, you want evidence preserved and witnesses identified. Beyond that, you don't want to talk about the incident at all until you have consulted a competent attorney who understands self defense law. Due to well-known effects of extreme stress in such an incident, you probably won't have a good handle on what happened (how many shots, how far away, etc.) for many hours, and getting it wrong will make you a "liar" when the evidence and witness statements are evaluated. Saying anything that makes it sound like it was an accident can be a big problem -- you can't "accidentally" shoot someone in self defense. The cops may not like it, but they'll understand it --- they're taught to do the same.

That said, you need an attorney who really understands self defense law. Few do -- legitimate self defense cases are rare. Many criminal defense attorneys have never defended a client they believed was innocent. Another Ayoob-ism: if you hire a guilty man's attorney, you'll probably get a guilty man's verdict.

[East_TN_Patriot]

As a former LEO, my standard response to this sort of question is to say no more than absolutely necessary to explain that you acted in self-defense and then politely say that you don't want to make any further statements until you have contacted an attorney. A simple statement of "The badguy approached me, displayed the intent to use force against me, I was in fear for my safety, and I acted in self-defense" with the pertinent details included to make your point. If you are clearly in the right, that statement should be sufficient for the time since it is likely that the scene will also provide clues to what actually happened. Beyond that, I would not be too eager to make a statement without an attorney.

[Spiffy]

I was in fear for my life and defended myself. I decline to answer anymore questions until I have had time to collect myself and my thought and talked to my lawyer. This is what happens to police officers when they are involved in shootings and I expect to be treated no differently.

[sigbrown1297]

Good video. I think its important to know your rights and to uphold them. No disrespect to LEOs, but you have to watch your own back and protect your rights because they don't always do.

[BlackHawk93]

As a former LEO, my standard response to this sort of question is to say no more than absolutely necessary to explain that you acted in self-defense and then politely say that you don't want to make any further statements until you have contacted an attorney. A simple statement of "The badguy approached me, displayed the intent to use force against me, I was in fear for my safety, and I acted in self-defense" with the pertinent details included to make your point. If you are clearly in the right, that statement should be sufficient for the time since it is likely that the scene will also provide clues to what actually happened. Beyond that, I would not be too eager to make a statement without an attorney.

+1

I was in fear for my life and defended myself. I decline to answer anymore questions until I have had time to collect myself and my thought and talked to my lawyer. This is what happens to police officers when they are involved in shootings and I expect to be treated no differently.

+2

[dlm37015]

i can tell you everything you say you will here again so for me i will call 911 then say nothing till my lwyer is there to counsel me that is the voice of experince

[diablo982]

i can tell you everything you say you will here again so for me i will call 911 then say nothing till my lwyer is there to counsel me that is the voice of experince

Not faulting your logic, but recommend giving a very brief statement before requesting your lawyer. If the other person is not totally incapacitated and can give a statement, you can bet your bottom dollar they will be telling the officer YOU were the one who came at them with a gun, and they grabbed for their baseball bat in self-defense, YOU invited them into your house and shot at them for no reason, etc. If the police only have one side of the story and you give them nothing to refute the other guy, you may get charged. Give a statement like, "He came at me with a baseball bat and I defended myself" or "He broke into my house and I defended myself" should be enough to give the police some idea of what happened. Give the finer details after you have a lawyer.

[TMF]

Yes give them aid. That way if you mess up they'll have something else they can sue you for.

Roger that. I'm a trained shooter, not a trained physician. Better leave that to the EMTs. I don't think any reasonable investigator/DA/jury would hold somebody accountable for not treating a wounded intruder. I'd be more worried about maintaining security in case he decides to become a threat again or if he has buddies. I have a family to worry about. Besides, if you DID just shoot someone and they're still alive, if they're conscious enough chances are they're not going to be very receptive to you treating them.

[billyscott]

Good way to put it TMF 18B. I'm not a trained medical professional. I figure if I call for an ambulance I have given the best care I can give.

[BigK]

Good stuff here. The whole don't talk to the cops idea seems like sound advice up to a point. As it's been said I wouldn't want to leave them wondering what happened when they arrive on the scene or have them taking the word of the BG.

I hope few real criminals heed that advice, though. The police need all the self-incriminating evidence they can get from thugs to get them off the streets.

Also, I'm curious about the point bkelm18 made about being sued for messing up trying to save the BG's life. I think he meant it tongue-in-cheek, but still...the state of TN has a Good Samaratin Law. Don't y'all think it'd protect you from being sued for mistakes while trying to render first aid.

[TMF]

Also, I'm curious about the point bkelm18 made about being sued for messing up trying to save the BG's life. I think he meant it tongue-in-cheek, but still...the state of TN has a Good Samaratin Law. Don't y'all think it'd protect you from being sued for mistakes while trying to render first aid.

Yeah, I mean it's kind of a joke, but at the same time anyone can sue you for anything. It doesn't mean that they're gonna win, but that's just more butt pain to deal with. My opinion isn't necessarily not to render first aid due to fear of being sued, but more a practical assessment of the reality following an SD shooting. If he is unconscious that quickly after the shooting chances are he's circling the drain anyway and there's very little you can do about it. If he is still conscious I doubt he'll be cooperative, thus putting you at risk if you were to let your guard down, especially if he has buddies that you don't know about lurking around the property. Personally I don't think it's unreasonable to maintain security on the criminal until authorities get there and take control. My biggest concern at that point isn't being sued anyway, it's keeping my family safe.

[DaveTN]

Having inside knowledge, in your opinion would the average investigator raise an eyebrow that someone involved in an SD shooting had an attorney on call for just such an occasion? I'm just thinking that making prior arrangements would suggest premeditation, intent or being predisposed to use deadly force.

Not at all, nothing wrong with being prepared. But if that’s what you want to do; that needs to happen right then.

I was a Patrol Officer, not a homicide investigator. The first thing that happens is I call our Patrol Command, tell them what I have and they start making decisions about who and what is needed at the scene. I personally want them making those decisions based on me telling them what happened as opposed to the Officer telling them “We don’t know what happened he is refusing to make a statement.â€

But as I said before, you need to do whatever you are willing to take responsibility for. If I shoot someone breaking into my house; I’m making a statement and ending it right then. If you are in a questionable situation, like a road rage incident or shot your neighbor because he was going to kick your azz; it’s probably time to lawyer up.

The sad thing is the lack of information available to citizens. Being able to read the law on an internet site doesn’t offer you opinions on how local DA’s will handle a case and doesn’t offer case law that may impact the written law. As a cop I had the luxury of knowing what the cops will do, being able to talk to the States Attorney for their opinions, and being able to talk to local Criminal Defense Attorneys’. I think local DA’s should be willing to meet with citizens groups and explain the laws like the use of deadly force, after all they are the ones that will decide if you are charged.

[Makiaveli]

Roger that. I'm a trained shooter, not a trained physician. Better leave that to the EMTs. I don't think any reasonable investigator/DA/jury would hold somebody accountable for not treating a wounded intruder. I'd be more worried about maintaining security in case he decides to become a threat again or if he has buddies. I have a family to worry about. Besides, if you DID just shoot someone and they're still alive, if they're conscious enough chances are they're not going to be very receptive to you treating them.

I have to agree with this. I would imagine the odds are truly astronomical, but what if he was faking or recovered enough to grab your gun, punch you etc?

Unfortunately, my wife is a Nurse Practitioner, and so I think she is legally obligated to assist. I guess sticking the barrel in his ear will suffice for security

[BigK]

Unfortunately, my wife is a Nurse Practitioner, and so I think she is legally obligated to assist. I guess sticking the barrel in his ear will suffice for security

Mine's an RN...I know what you mean.

We once passed a bad accident and the ambulance hadn't arrived yet. We had to pull over to see if they needed help...something about possibly losing her license if we didn't.

She once jokingly said, 'Please don't shoot 'em. I'll just have to patch 'em up. What's the point?'

[Fallguy]

I have to agree with this. I would imagine the odds are truly astronomical, but what if he was faking or recovered enough to grab your gun, punch you etc?

Unfortunately, my wife is a Nurse Practitioner, and so I think she is legally obligated to assist. I guess sticking the barrel in his ear will suffice for security

Mine's an RN...I know what you mean.

We once passed a bad accident and the ambulance hadn't arrived yet. We had to pull over to see if they needed help...something about possibly losing her license if we didn't.

She once jokingly said, 'Please don't shoot 'em. I'll just have to patch 'em up. What's the point?'

I'm not necessarily doubting this, but is there a place where one can see this duty to act spelled out?

I am an EMT, other than when I am on duty...I have no "legal" duty to act, I could (if I chose to) drive right by an accident and would not have any legal liability. This is taught in the first class or two of EMT school. Of course not sure how anyone seeing me drive by would know I'm an EMT or even if they did, how they would know who I am to file any suit...but anyway. (Just to note there is a law that requires anyone who is first on the scene of an accident to stop and render what aid they are able to.)

My mother was a RN for 40+ years and I never heard her mention anything like have a "legal" duty to act in such scenarios as above.

One thing to remember only Medical Doctors can legally practice medicine. Every Nurse, Paramedic, EMT etc.... is acting under the authority of some MD somewhere. The only reason I can do what I do at work is because or Medical Director has signed off on a list of Standing Orders on what to do in situations. If I do anything not allowed in those standing orders, without direct authorization, I would be liable for malfeasance.

It may seem nurses are doing things independently in a hospital, but they are not, everything they do that would be considered as practicing medicine was ordered by some doctor.

Edited December 16, 2011 by Fallguy

[BigK]

I'm not necessarily doubting this, but is there a place where one can see this duty to act spelled out?

I am an EMT, other than when I am on duty...I have no "legal" duty to act, I could (if I chose to) drive right by an accident and would not have any legal liability. This is taught in the first class or two of EMT school. Of course not sure how anyone seeing me drive by would know I'm an EMT or even if they did, how they would know who I am to file any suit...but anyway. (Just to note there is a law that requires anyone who is first on the scene of an accident to stop and render what aid they are able to.)

My mother was a RN for 40+ years and I never heard her mention anything like have a "legal" duty to act in such scenarios as above.

One thing to remember only Medical Doctors can legally practice medicine. Every Nurse, Paramedic, EMT etc.... is acting under the authority of some MD somewhere. The only reason I can do what I do at work is because or Medical Director has signed off on a list of Standing Orders on what to do in situations. If I do anything not allowed in those standing orders, without direct authorization, I would be liable for malfeasance.

It may seem nurses are doing things independently in a hospital, but they are not, everything they do that would be considered as practicing medicine was ordered by some doctor.

I looked for some "proof" as well, but found none.

All I can tell you is that my wife got her BSN from MTSU. She had more than one instructor tell the students that the state of TN could revoke their nursing license for refusing to give care to someone in need. They specifically cited passing by an accident without stopping to see if anyone needed medical attention as one of these grounds.

Naturally it would be hard to prove, but the instructors said it has happened. In fact, around that time the state came out with specialty license plates for nurses. Several instructors said they'd never get one of those plates, because if they passed an accident without stopping to render care, it'd be too easy for them to be tracked down.

Regardless, I'd guess it's a rule of the licensing board for nurses, not an actual law.

[Fallguy]

I looked for some "proof" as well, but found none.

All I can tell you is that my wife got her BSN from MTSU. She had more than one instructor tell the students that the state of TN could revoke their nursing license for refusing to give care to someone in need. They specifically cited passing by an accident without stopping to see if anyone needed medical attention as one of these grounds.

Naturally it would be hard to prove, but the instructors said it has happened. In fact, around that time the state came out with specialty license plates for nurses. Several instructors said they'd never get one of those plates, because if they passed an accident without stopping to render care, it'd be too easy for them to be tracked down.

Regardless, I'd guess it's a rule of the licensing board for nurses, not an actual law.

I have looked at the Board of Nursing policies and their rules (Tennessee Department of Health: Board of Nursing Statutes, Rules, and Policies & 1000 Tennessee Board of Nursing) as with the HCP law...there is a "catch all" rule about "unprofessional conduct". One thing that would constitute unprofessional conduct is "patient abandonment" (see pg 18 of the "Position Statement" under Polices) But for patient abandonment to have occurred the very first thing it says is the nurse must "Have first accepted the patient assignment, thus establishing a nurse-patient relationship" Accepted being underline is their doing, not mine. So if the nurse can accept a patient assignment to me that would mean they could refuse and/or not accept one. I wouldn't see how driving by a wreck establishes a nurse-patient relationship. Now I completely agree if a nurse has stopped and started to render aid....she can't just up and leave without giving care over to someone else or making some sort of arrangements for continued care.

On down in the Position Statement it says "Failure of a nurse to work beyond her/his scheduled work shift will not constitute patient abandonment as defined by the Board. Also refusal to accept an assignment or a nurse-patient relationship and failure to notify the employing agency that the nurse will not appear to work an assigned shift is not considered patient abandonment by the TBN."

Just to note, there is a rule that says they can not discriminate based on "race, age, sex, religion, national origin, or the condition of the patient" (Rule 1000-01-.13(p) for Rn's; Rule 1000-02-.13(p) for LPN's)

I don't doubt instructors have or still do tell there students they can't drive by an accident, but IMO (which is worth nothing) nothing in the law or The Tennessee Board of Nursing rules/regulations/policies requires them to render aid to someone that have not chosen to begin nurse-patient relationship with as long as they don't discriminate for any of the above reasons.