Scenario.....

A

avpshadowman

Joined
Apr 13, 2000
Messages
225
Just wondering, lets say carrying a knife was illegal where i live, and for some reason, i need to defend myself with lethal force. How would the law look upon me should the attacker be seriously injured/killed due to my counter attack with the knife? would i be placed in an unfavourable light since i was breaking the law in the first place by carrying?

This could be applied for other examples, eg. a unregistered handgun etc. etc.

Daniel

 
This will partially depend on how the jurisdiction where the event occurred handles lethal force incidents. In my county, a grand jury would be convened that would examine all the possible charges, from murder to illegally carrying the weapon. Assuming your use of force was justified, it would be up to the grand jury on whether to charge you with illegally carrying the weapon or to overlook it and completely clear you.
 
I don't know if I am spelling the guys name right, but In New York Bernard Guest (I can't come up with a spelling that looks even remotely right) spent several years in prison for shooting several punks that attacked him on the subway.

More recently is the case in England of the older farmer who was sentenced to life in prison after using his shotgun to defend his farm from criminal invasion.

smile.gif



Mike
 
I think a lot of it depends on the jurisdiction. It would really be up to a grand jury or prosecutor to decide. It would probably really depend on the totality of the circumstances.

------------------
Dennis Bible
 
That's a really good question. It probably is one of those things that would depend on the jurisdiction, as other people have pointed out.

I found a reference to this case in an annotation in the Colorado Revised Statues:
Instruction on possession of knife erroneous. It was error to instruct the jury that it was unlawful to possess or carry a pocket knife, the blade of which can be opened by mechanical contrivance, where the information charged the defendant with an alleged assault with a deadly weapon, and not with violating such statute. Watts v. People, 159 Colo. 347, 411 P.2d 335 (1966).
Click to expand...
You might interpret this ruling differently, but I think it says that the prosecutor can't tell the jury that the knife you used in an assault was illegal (in this instance, it was an auto, which are illegal in CO). If you use a knife in self-defense and they decide to prosecute, you'll likely be chared with assault or murder or whatever, and the issue of self-defense comes up as a defense in your case.

Even though they can't tell the jury that your knife was illegal in an assault trial, they can still charge you with possesion of an illegal weapon in a separate case. That's what happened to Bernard Goetz: a jury acquitted him of attempted murder in 1987, but he still ended up serving eight-and-a-half months for possession of an illegal weapon. - http://cgi.cnn.com/US/9604/08/subway.gunner/index.html

However, some jurisdictions have laws that say that you can't be charged with possesion of an illegal weapon if you used the weapon in self-defense. For instance, this quote is from the municipal code of the city of Broomfield, CO, which is just north of Denver:
9-72-020 Possession and use of weapons. A) It is unlawful for any person to possess an illegal weapon. (B) Except in a person's dwelling, place of business, or on property under such person's ownership or control, it is unlawful for any person to possess the following: ...(the usual list of weapons)

(6) It is an affirmative defense to a violation of subsections (B) through (D) that:

a. The defendant was reasonably engaged in lawful use of force in defense of a person, premises, or property under state statutes;
Click to expand...
- http://www.ci.broomfield.co.us/code/


[This message has been edited by cerulean (edited 09-25-2000).]
 
Unfortunately, and probably to your dismay, there IS no single "pat" answer to any and all possible situations.

Cerulean is a pretty sharp (excuse the pun) guy. He speaks wisely. But we still must ALL, regardless of location, remember a few very basic things, not necessarily in order of importance or priority:

*Most laws are NOT intended to "guarantee" our safety or security.

*MOST laws are directly or indirectly, intended to establish and promote government authority, NOT the welfare of an individual.

*Every jurisdiction, as every scenario, is different. The same results CANNOT be predicted predicated on a previous one ("case law" notwithstanding).

* We can NOT expect "common sense" to interfere with the pronouncements of "The LAW".

*NO ONE can adise you in a given situatiuon what *YOU* "SHOULD" do. Only *YOU* can determine that, and then only at such a time as necessary to make a quick decision.

Knowing that, it is wise to prepare yourself as well for the aftermath of a violent encounter as before. Often, the subsequent legal gauntlet can be as intimidating, and even as dangerous for the average lawful individual, as the incident that led to it.

The bottom line is the same as may be applied to most other situations in life. Be prepared, be alert, be well trained in your endeavors, and above all, keep your wits about you at all times.

Good luck.


------------------
George
StarPD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top