Liability question

[Guest kj4gxu]

I took my HCP class last Friday and I have to ask about a piece of information/advice given by the instructor that I'm having difficulty reconciling.

His advice was this: If you are ever involved in a shooting and the attacker is hit and or killed, take some time to compose your self before calling 911.  

This is a close paraphrase of his words.  My initial thought was he was talking about 1 or 2 minutes, but when I questioned whether this would expose me to greater liability because I sat there and "let the guy bleed out" he actually commented that most police would understand if they were told "I needed 15 or 20 minutes to compose myself".

I fully understand the logic used to justify this.  If you immediately dial 911, you are going to be very excited and could blurt out something that makes you sound guilty of something.  Instead it would be good to compose yourself before getting your voice recorded discussing the event.  I do understand that.

 

However

 

As a firefighter and Medical First Responder I find myself thinking about it from a patient care provider.  even 1 to 5 minutes could mean the difference between saving the attackers life and them being beyond medical assistance.

 

even if the attacker is DRT I find myself wondering if a crafty prosecutor or civil lawyer could take that pause of up to 20 mintues and say that it's proof of your indifference and your intent to kill as opposed to an intent to defend even going so far as to accuse you of "waiting for the victim to die" before calling 911.

 

 

I know would I would do in the situation, I'm just curious about everyone else's opinion of the logic above.

I will say overall that the instructor was outstanding and I learned a lot in the class, I would recommend the class to anyone asking, but at the same time I'd give them my opinion on this one piece of information.  

Thanks

Eric

Edited April 1, 2013 by kj4gxu

[Dolomite_supafly]

Call 911 immediately, do not wait because witnesses leave the area.

 

Then when the officers are there tell them you were the victim. Then tell them the subjects actions put you in fear. Do not refer to the person that is shot as the victim, you are the victim. The person shot is the subject, not you.

 

Beyond that I would not offer any more information. Be cooperative be do not offer any information without being asked.

Edited April 1, 2013 by Dolomite_supafly

[Guest kj4gxu]

Dolomite, I was using the "Victim" term to demonstrate how I thought it would end up in court if one were to wait, I fully understand that in that scenario I am the victim.

As I said, I already know how I'd react but just thought the topic was worth discussion.

[Guest nra37922]

Call 911.

 

I was in fear of my life

 

Shut the hell up

 

Police show up

 

There is the attacker

 

I was in fear of my life

 

I need to go to the hospital

 

Shut the hell up

 

Call your attorney

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'd call 911, and, make an attempt to render aid, hoping the guy would never get back up. Sorry, but if I had to draw my

weapon, I wouldn't be worrying about his welfare. Too many other things could go wrong and I would be a little shook up

to be of much help with any medical aid. I wouldn't worry about the good samaritan thing too much in this situation. He

made his bed, and I have to deal with the aftermath, which may be unknown.

[dlm37015]

Call 911.

 

I was in fear of my life

 

Shut the hell up

 

Police show up

 

There is the attacker

 

I was in fear of my life

 

I need to go to the hospital

 

Shut the hell up

 

Call your attorney

that tells it like it is .even a policeman in a shooting has a lawyer before statement

[Randall53]

The lawyer thing. Does everybody here have a lawyer? I don't.....

[Jonnin]

don't say any more than you have to.  They routinely use 911 calls as evidence against people --- so say where you are, that you were attacked and had to shoot your attacker, and then avoid saying anything else at all beyond medical info Q&A that goes with such a call (is he alive, breathing, etc). 

[npgunner]

I think this is a classic situation where "less is more" wins out (with regards to what to say).
As a fellow medical professional, I sympathize with your concern that taking 20 mins could certainly lead to death, so personally, I wouldn't wait to call. I don't know what the legal expectation is though for me to render help to the attacker. Maybe someone with more legal experience could clarify on this? I understand that Good Samaritan is likely to protect me in case of error while rendering the assistance, but don't know that it compels me to offer aid to someone I shot. I most likely would follow directions given to me by 911 operator.

Edited to correct the incorrect auto-correct. Edited April 1, 2013 by npgunner

[2.ooohhh]

The lawyer thing. Does everybody here have a lawyer? I don't.....

 

No, I have Lawyers.   :2cents:

 

 

I would also render no aid to someone I had just shot in a self defense situation.

Edited April 1, 2013 by 2.ooohhh

[DaveTN]

The lawyer thing. Does everybody here have a lawyer? I don't.....

I don’t have one here. But I know the difference in a good shoot and a bad one. I have attorneys in another state I can call at any hour if I find myself in a bad shoot. Cops at the scene will be making decisions that will impact my future; they will be making those decisions with my input.

 

However, don’t trust your future and possibly your freedom to what people tell you on an internet forum. If you think you are going to invoke your right to remain silent until talking with an attorney; make sure you know an attorney you can contact.

 

An instructor that tells you to wait 15 or 20 minutes before calling 911 is an idiot.

 

Even if you have to pull a gun and don’t have to shoot anyone; call 911 right then and wait on an Officer.

[RED333]

I have 2 as well, I tried to get them on retainer, both said "Do not worry, just call".

[JayC]

I agree, call 911 right away, just keep the dialog to a minimum on the phone...  You were attacked, and where you're at, etc...  The best advice I've heard is to communicate details that need to be collected or documented right away...  That they had a gun, where the gun is, who the eye witnesses are, if anybody got away or ran off...  etc...  And then request that the officer give you time to compose yourself before making a formal statement.

 

I doubt many officers are going to hold it against you to ask for a few minutes to compose yourself before giving a statement...  the fact is that is what they'd do in a self defense shooting as well.

[East_TN_Patriot]

To echo and expand on what the others are saying, the instructor was trying to get you to take a deep breath before you call 911 and say something that can be used against you later.  When I was in law enforcement, my plan following a shooting was to call for assistance, render aid, and immediately call my PBA lawyer (fortunately I never had to put that plan into action).  If you are involved in a shooting as a CCW holder, go ahead and plan on talking to the police and the district attorney, possibly multiple times.  Also, plan on getting sued by the bad guy/gal or their relatives.  The rules governing evidence in a civil trial are different than a criminal trial.  The point is that anything you say, including during a 911 call, can be used against you.  Also, consider that courts generally give excited utterances credibility because it is assumed that people won't have the time to make up a story while they are emotionally keyed up.  However, if you wait too long to make that 911 call, you are almost certain to be held civilly liable and possible criminally liable as well, which I presume was the point of your original question.

 

Work on this scenario in your mind because mental preparation is important here as in the actual defense situation.  This is also the reason why people need to be absolutely certain that the use of deadly force was absolutely essential.  If you really believe the shooting was absolutely necessary, you are less likely to say anything that would suggest otherwise.  

 

As far as the actions of the police, generally, upon arrival at the scene anticipate being approached at gun point, placed on the ground, and handcuffed until the officers can get control of the situation and determine that everything is safe.  It's not personal, so don't take it that way.  You may be Mother Teresa's first cousin, but all the officers know upon arrival is that you shot someone.  The officers may or may not take an initial statement at the scene, but they will likely transport you to the police station for a more in-depth interview.  I would request an attorney before making any detailed statement beyond the very minimal information to establish the shooting as a self-defense shooting.  The 911 call should be pulled by the investigator and added to the evidence related to the case.  

Edited April 2, 2013 by East_TN_Patriot

[Randall53]

No, I have Lawyers.   :2cents:
 
I would also render no aid to someone I had just shot in a self defense situation.

Well, I don't know anyone that's a lawyer, but if I had one I'd want one that enoys the shooting sports I think.

I'd think that if you shot someone even in self defense an attempted to render aid, it could go south pretty quick if they died in the process. It could be said you didn't want them to survive and did something to make sure they didn't.....ahhh. Maybe I've been watching too much CSI.....

[RobertNashville]

You might find this interesting...

 

 

"Shootings and other use of force incidents can result in heightened physical and emotional reactions for the participants. It is recommended that officers involved in such incidents be given a minimum three days leave, either administrative or through regular days off, in order to marshal their natural coping skills to manage the emotional impact of the incident prior to return to duty or the preparation of a use of force or incident report. Those who were present at the scene but did not discharge their weapons may also be emotionally impacted by the incident and may benefit from a period of administrative  leave. It is important that officers and the public understand that administrative leave is a routine procedure and not a disciplinary suspension". from "Officer Involved Shooting Guidelines, IACP Police Psychological Services Section, Denver, Colorado 2009"

 

I had been told numerous times that most police departments have a policy similar to the above and that they do because they KNOW that when an officer is involved in a shooting, they aren't going to be thinking straight for a while. That applies to civilians too because we all have the same chemicals rushing through our bodies when we are faced in that kind of situation. That's why you don't want to be offering a lot of information or answering a lot of questions immediately after a self-defense shooting and especially not without your attorney present. I think that most LE will understand why a person involved in a SD shooting will not just want but really needs some time to compose him/her self before answering a lot of questions.

 

You DO want to be the first person to call 911. You DO need to give basic information such as has already been suggested.  You also want to make sure that the 911 operator (and the police) know who you are/what you look like so that when LE arrive on the scene they don't mistake you for the bad guy! You also should have the phone number (cell if possible) of one or two attorneys you can call from the scene...keep their numbers in your wallet. Practice the things you NEED to say ahead of time so that when the emotions are flowing you'll know what to say and what not to say.

Edited April 2, 2013 by RobertNashville

[RobertNashville]

No, I have Lawyers.   :2cents:

 

 

I would also render no aid to someone I had just shot in a self defense situation.

No one says you have to render aid and certainly, the bad guy should be last to get it if others need it but if you are ever involved in a shooting you can bet your 15 seconds of actions will be judged with a magnifier glass over hours, days and weeks; rendering aid to the person you just shot is one very good way to help those who will be doing the perceiving, perceive you as the victim/good guy.

[dlm37015]

if i shoot somebody i am gonna shoot them till they are graveyard dead .wont need no dr but 1 of us will be dead end of story

[Old Man]

The biggest thing to remember is that you are "shooting to stop the actions of the attacker".  Once those actions stop, you are no longer justified in shooting that person.  The crime scene personel will be able to tell, for the most part, where the person was when you fired.  Do not EVER say anything even remotely like "I was trying to kill him" or you will end up in prison no matter how it started off.  I actually had a victim tell me he was not scared for his life when he shot the attacker.  The victim did 5 years!

[npgunner]

No one says you have to render aid and certainly, the bad guy should be last to get it if others need it but if you are ever involved in a shooting you can bet your 15 seconds of actions will be judged with a magnifier glass over hours, days and weeks; rendering aid to the person you just shot is one very good way to help those who will be doing the perceiving, perceive you as the victim/good guy.

So my question is would rendering aid be seen as:
1. what a nice guy, he's helping out someone that attacked and tried to kill him
2. he's admitting he shouldn't have shot the attacker because now he's trying save the attacker's life, and is thus an admission that he shouldn't have shot him

The way I see it, if I shoot someone to "stop the threat," the threat may or may not be laying dead in the street. If the threat has stopped (attacker down), but is not dead, it would be in my best interest (since trained to respond to this situation) to offer at least a superficial amount of aid. But Im worried if that would be perceived as an unconscious admission of "I shouldn't have shot the guy." Especially in a civil lawsuit. I'm interested to hear y'all's thoughts and opinions.

[2.ooohhh]

Well, I don't know anyone that's a lawyer, but if I had one I'd want one that enoys the shooting sports I think.

I'd think that if you shot someone even in self defense an attempted to render aid, it could go south pretty quick if they died in the process. It could be said you didn't want them to survive and did something to make sure they didn't.....ahhh. Maybe I've been watching too much CSI.....

 

 

I have multiple lawyers b/c in my experience one lawyer cannot do everything, at least not very well. I have a top notch criminal defense attorney, among others. In this case you will want a good criminal defense attorney, or an attorney specializing in firearms used in self defense. If you carry a firearm you should research right now and pick a lawyer before hand that you trust to defend you in the future and program them into you phone before the SHTF.  First call is 911(that is me "rendering aid" in this situation), 2nd call is the lawyer.

 

 

I won't go into the details b/c it's a long drawn out story, but I will say that I learned this the hard way, a long time ago.

[S&WForty]

My permit class instructor gave the scenario that a witness not close enough to the scene may mistake your giving aid to the perp as you trying to finish them off by hand.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[RED333]

As far as the actions of the police, generally, upon arrival at the scene anticipate being approached at gun point, placed on the ground, and handcuffed until the officers can get control of the situation and determine that everything is safe.  It's not personal, so don't take it that way.  You may be Mother Teresa's first cousin, but all the officers know upon arrival is that you shot someone.  The officers may or may not take an initial statement at the scene, but they will likely transport you to the police station for a more in-depth interview.  I would request an attorney before making any detailed statement beyond the very minimal information to establish the shooting as a self-defense shooting.  The 911 call should be pulled by the investigator and added to the evidence related to the case.  

Good advice and info here.

[peejman]

Here's a good book that addresses this topic from the perspective of several actual scenarios...   http://www.amazon.com/Lessons-Armed-America-Kathy-Jackson/dp/1453685553

 

And essentially what most everyone else said.  Take a couple deep breaths, then call.  Say only what's necessary.  Don't answer any questions regarding how it happened until you've got an attorney.

[Guest PapaB]

I'll pretend I'm a regular person on a jury.

 

Defendant was attacked, I feel bad for them.

In fear for their life, I feel bad for them.

They waited 15 minutes to call 911. Hold it! Red flag! What were they doing? Waiting for the person to die, making up a story, hiding or destroying evidence, maybe all of the above.

Now I'm suspicious, distrustful and figure where there's smoke there's fire. Guilty as charged.

 

When you're in fear for your life rendering aid isn't the response of most people. A jury can't really walk in your shoes, they try to fit you in theirs (what would they have done). If you rendered aid you might have felt what you did was wrong or excessive. Are you lying about how things happened or holding back information? I'm now suspicious of you and that's not good.

 

Massad Ayoob has some good advice on what to do after a shooting. It's good to watch it on a regular basis to keep the info fresh.