Not in a case where you put yourself in danger in the first place. You can’t place yourself in front of moving car and then shoot the driver in self-defense.
Maybe but these are all terms of art that really acquire their meaning through reference to specific facts - if that made any sense. What I’m trying to say is that you can have general principles but they don’t take on a patina of ‘realness’ until they’re applied.
Beyond that though, the comment from the judge is puzzling. It sounds like he’s saying that there is some affirmative defense burden attendant to a Vol.MS charge. I seriously doubt that is correct though so I don’t know if that was just taken out of context or it was just a misstatement.
Anyway, here’s a good article that sums up the distinction between MS and VMS. This also looks good but is over 40 pages.
This is absolutely ridiculous. A police officer on duty is not supposed to place himself in a place of danger? Really? So they shouldn’t ever respond to domestic assaults, bar fights or even traffic stops? It’s the officers fault when someone is intentionally trying to kill them? Wow, I guess a woman should never walk across a parking garage or stairway because if she gets raped it was HER fault because she placed herself in danger.
Are you making an effort to ignore the relevant issue here? Because if not, the distinctions should be pretty clear.
Explain your first sentence, please.
He’s not supposed to stand in front of a car full of bad guys. Of course, we don’t know how he came to be in front of the car.
Hijack: a deputy here answered a domestic dispute several years ago, and the couple attacked him. He was ridiculed for taking his weapon apart when they tried to take it from him rather than shoot them. Guy had more balls than I.
As carnivorousplant said, and the equivalent situation is a women who voluntarily walks into the arms of someone she knows will rape her instead of stepping to the side to a place she where she knows she will be safe, which is something women don’t do because it’s stupid.
You blame the victim. I blame the thug.
A woman should be able to walk to her car after work without being attacked. An officer should be able to respond to a car burglary without being murdered. Blame the bad person who is inflicting the harm, not the victim.
That has nothing to do with it. Women don’t volunteer to be raped. Technically it’s not possible. An officer can respond to a car burglary without being murdered. Responding to a car burglary doesn’t give them a license to murder a burglar.
Officers agree to take on increased risk when they take the job. If they don’t like dealing with criminals and scary situations, they can quit. The act of responding to a burglary is obviously putting oneself in harm’s way. He was aware of the risks in general, and in this specific case and chose to take them on.
I did not agree to take on increased risk when I was born with a vagina, and even though I am bone tired of sexist assholes and their bullshit, I cannot just quit being a woman. Your comparison is wrong and offensive.
Mistrial declared after two days of deliberations. I suspect there will be another trial. This shooting has been pretty polarizing here.
No word yet on how the jury voted.
Thanks, Ace.
Why is this relevant here? I don’t see anything in the links saying that he placed himself in front of a moving car.
What he is claiming is
This judge is a hard ass. 25 grand fine. The defense attorney will probably appeal that fine.
I didn’t realize that the judge would automatically reschedule a new trial after this hung jury. I thought that was a decision the prosecutor made. <shrug> It all starts over the middle of Sept.
I was responding with a hypothetical about why the judge wouldn’t allow the defendant to argue self-defense. The facts of the case may have excluded that possibility if the cop had placed himself in that position in defiance of regulations and common sense. I’m not saying that’s what actually happened here. My following posts were responding to some ridiculous claims about rape, and not really meant to apply to the police case at all.
I don’t believe that you can claim self defense in Arkansas unless you are in your own home or you have retreated as far as you can from danger.
When you do this, you should really make this clear in your post.
WTF? 
IMNSHO, that ruling is about as wrong as one can be. If the shooting was done in self-defense, then by definition it was not reckless and it was reasonable.