Consider this #7: talking to LE after a shoot

[Robin]

The only information you MUST give to police is that you want your lawyer. Watch the video.

The Law Professor

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="
http://www.youtube.com/v/i8z7NC5sgik&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
http://www.youtube.com/v/i8z7NC5sgik&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

The Cop

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="
http://www.youtube.com/v/08fZQWjDVKE&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
http://www.youtube.com/v/08fZQWjDVKE&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Thanks for taking the time to dig up that video link. I have seen it before. It does contain good information but like anything should not be considered the end-all and be-all regarding a given subject. As any good instructor will say, take what other people offer with an open mind. Evaluate it against previous training and experience and see if it will fit in your toolbox. Just because it works for one person (or many) doesn't mean it will work for you. But try to understand where it's coming from and what it's based on.

I think we can both agree the main point in talking with LE after a justifiable shoot is to make sure nothing is said that could be used against you at a later time. However there are some things you should say in order to secure the scene. None of them are by themselves incriminating.

1. Location of weapon you used. This one should be pretty basic. Officers will want to take possession as evidence but they also want to make sure it isn't lying around where it could pose a hazard to someone else. An "I ain't saying nothing without a lawyer" response doesn't help regarding this one even in cases where it does incriminate the suspect. There have been many cases of suspects who ditched a weapon during a chase and officers interrogate them in the field in order to recover it despite "I want my lawyer" refusals. Use of that weapon as evidence against the suspect has been upheld in court.

2. Location and direction of shots fired. TBD already touched on the topic of overpenetration and knowing your backstop. You may not always have that luxury and/or shots could be fired wild. Imagine this scenario: you engage a home intruder at night. One of your missed shots exits your house, enters your neighbor's and severely injures them.  Police arrive on scene and you refuse to say anything. Yes the officers will go door to door asking for witness statements. Yes a crime scene tech will look for spent brass and bullet holes. But all of that will take time and an unconscious neighbor who didn't respond to a knock at their door could bleed out before they're discovered. Is this a remote scenario? Of course it is--but realistically speaking so is a home invasion for most of us. That doesn't mean we shouldn't prepare just in case. If that scenario played out you would feel terrible knowing you could have helped save your neighbor's life but didn't. As others have pointed out eventually the police will put together all that information. So why not tell them up front in case someone else needs help?

3. Description of suspects. I thought this would be a no-brainer but apparently not. If you shot one person and other suspects fled the scene, wouldn't you want to give the best description you can so officers have a chance to catch them before they get away? Even knowing there was more than just one person is enough to try setting up a perimeter.

As I have said before, none of this information by itself will get you in trouble. Officers (and DAs) can sympathize with a victim who gave some basic information to help secure the scene but didn't want to say anything beyond that. Blindly saying "I want my lawyer" and refusing to even say where the firearm you used is located isn't the way to go.

[tombogan03884]

Thanks for taking the time to dig up that video link. I have seen it before. It does contain good information but like anything should not be considered the end-all and be-all regarding a given subject. As any good instructor will say, take what other people offer with an open mind. Evaluate it against previous training and experience and see if it will fit in your toolbox. Just because it works for one person (or many) doesn't mean it will work for you. But try to understand where it's coming from and what it's based on.

I think we can both agree the main point in talking with LE after a justifiable shoot is to make sure nothing is said that could be used against you at a later time. However there are some things you should say in order to secure the scene. None of them are by themselves incriminating.

1. Location of weapon you used. This one should be pretty basic. Officers will want to take possession as evidence but they also want to make sure it isn't lying around where it could pose a hazard to someone else. An "I ain't saying nothing without a lawyer" response doesn't help regarding this one even in cases where it does incriminate the suspect. There have been many cases of suspects who ditched a weapon during a chase and officers interrogate them in the field in order to recover it despite "I want my lawyer" refusals. Use of that weapon as evidence against the suspect has been upheld in court.

2. Location and direction of shots fired. TBD already touched on the topic of overpenetration and knowing your backstop. You may not always have that luxury and/or shots could be fired wild. Imagine this scenario: you engage a home intruder at night. One of your missed shots exits your house, enters your neighbor's and severely injures them.  Police arrive on scene and you refuse to say anything. Yes the officers will go door to door asking for witness statements. Yes a crime scene tech will look for spent brass and bullet holes. But all of that will take time and an unconscious neighbor who didn't respond to a knock at their door could bleed out before they're discovered. Is this a remote scenario? Of course it is--but realistically speaking so is a home invasion for most of us. That doesn't mean we shouldn't prepare just in case. If that scenario played out you would feel terrible knowing you could have helped save your neighbor's life but didn't. As others have pointed out eventually the police will put together all that information. So why not tell them up front in case someone else needs help?

3. Description of suspects. I thought this would be a no-brainer but apparently not. If you shot one person and other suspects fled the scene, wouldn't you want to give the best description you can so officers have a chance to catch them before they get away? Even knowing there was more than just one person is enough to try setting up a perimeter.

As I have said before, none of this information by itself will get you in trouble. Officers (and DAs) can sympathize with a victim who gave some basic information to help secure the scene but didn't want to say anything beyond that. Blindly saying "I want my lawyer" and refusing to even say where the firearm you used is located isn't the way to go.

You raise several very good points in this series of posts Robin,

" One of your missed shots exits your house, enters your neighbor's and severely injures them."

That is not so far fetched at all considering the number of people who live in apartments (like myself) or closely built housing developments.

But it is still wise to remember the line from the Miranda warning that says "Anything you say will be used against you".

In short I think everyone who owns a firearm for self defense should watch the video's you quoted while keeping in mind the stipulations you have raised.
Another must would be formal training from a recognized source such as Mossad Ayoob's Lethal Force Institute.

[fullautovalmet76]

Robin,
Your proposals seem a bit naive. I suggest paying a couple of hundred bucks to talk to a top criminal defense attorney in your area to find out about self defense with a firearm and what one should do if they are faced with this scenario. It could save you alot of heartache later on.

I used to work for the court in my hometown and I would talk to the judges and prosecutors about case law. I was surprised to find out that people are sent to prison all the time on weak circumstantial evidence. The prosecutors would tell me that if they can get the pieces of the puzzle to fit (and they don't have to fit neatly) to get a conviction, they will do it. They don't feel bad because everyone they send to prison claims they are innocent.

I'm not saying you have this mindset, but many people in this country believe too much of what they see on television crime shows. The criminal justice system, at least in my area, is far more complex and political than anything like what anyone sees on television.

[1776 Rebel]

To easy to forget. "I NEED AN AMBULANCE, I HAVE SHOT SOMEONE AND THEY ARE INJURED. I HAVE HEART PROBLEMS ETC...." Better to have too many responders than too few. If you have heard the numbnuts  that man 911 you wouldn't be surprised if they didn't ask about injuries.

[Robin]

Robin, Your proposals seem a bit naive.

In what way does what I suggest seem naive? (And no, I don't watch CSI or similar shows.) There are three separate things I suggest telling officers as part of initial scene safety. I do not believe any of these things can compromise your legal defense. If you have reason to suggest otherwise I would really like to hear it.

Oh, one other related "neat trick": if you can do it, get a copy of your state's jury instructions for justifiable homicide. Jury instructions state in easy to understand terms the level of proof required to convict or conversely, to acquit. In the case of justifiable homicide it states the requirements that must be met in order to justify killing someone.

[Sponsor]

[fullautovalmet76]

In what way does what I suggest seem naive? (And no, I don't watch CSI or similar shows.) There are three separate things I suggest telling officers as part of initial scene safety. I do not believe any of these things can compromise your legal defense. If you have reason to suggest otherwise I would really like to hear it.

Your suggestions are naive to me based not only the videos Tom posted but what the judges and prosecutors I spoke with told me. But you seem like you are pretty smart, so you should probably handle it the way you see fit.

[Rob Pincus]

Guys, try to keep "immediate aftermath" which is something we address in season 1 and includes the 911 call  (see other thread) and the longer term aftermath which starts with your interview by LE on the scene.

I am always careful to point out to most students that I am teaching for the street, not for the court. One thing that we didn't get a chance to get into this season, but was covered on a training DVD that was recently released, is the Three Fights concept. I originally heard this concept expressed this way by Tony Blauer during some SPEAR training.

Fight 1: Preparation.
This fight is describe  as You vs. You. How do you prepare? How much training do you do? How do you equip yourself? Do you follow Janich's advice on prepping your home or do you keep your doors unlocked and your guns and ammo in separate safes? Everything you do prior to an incident is Fight 1.

Fight 2: Conflict.
This is the actaul Fight that consists of You vs. Bad Guy(s). This is the fight that most of us spend 99% of our time worrying about. How do I shoot?   how do I punch?  This is the fight that 90% of my teaching is aimed at. What do you do when you are in "the" fight?

Fight 3: Aftermath.
The aftermath is You Vs. Everything.  This is all of the ramifications of the conflict. Medical, Personal, Financial, Social, etc., etc.. In fact, I define the existance of "conflict" by the existance of an aftermath. If someone else's actions affected you in a negative way (including having to spend extra energy to walk around the block...etc), then you were in a conflict. The aftermath starts immediately and lasts forever and is the most complex fight. It is also the hardest to prepare for. The most important part of the aftermath for our discussions should probably be the way it affects our Fight 1 in relation to future conflict. Learning from previous conflict (yours or others') is vitally important to efficiency in Fight 1.

All that said, my advice is to cooperate with law enforcement personnel on the scene. They are doing their job and if you were in the right you shouldn't worry about answering simple questions directly. Lawyers may not agree and ultimately you're going to have to decide what is best for you. One lawyer, one police officer or one instructor are simply going to be expressing their opinion. There are so many variables involved in which officer, prosecutor, grand jury, judge, jury, defendant, lawyers, etc are involved that you are never going to get hard & fast 100% accurate advice about what is the best thing to say at any given point. If you think you are smart enough to carry a gun to defend yourself, you better be smart enough to handle the aftermath. As I often say in class: The shooting is going to be the easy part.

-RJP

[Robin]

If you have heard the numbnuts  that man 911 you wouldn't be surprised if they didn't ask about injuries.

I guess I'm atypical then in that my dealings with dispatch have been pretty good and none of the deficiencies you mention were apparent. But you're right, that doesn't mean it follows every dispatcher is on top of their game. In another thread (NT #1) I suggested giving out a bare minimum of info and waiting for dispatch to ask additional questions. That was based on my experiences where dispatch was good at following up and thus eliminated the need to remember a long list of things to say. Thanks for pointing out the flaw in my thinking.

[Robin]

Your suggestions are naive to me based not only the videos Tom posted but what the judges and prosecutors I spoke with told me. But you seem like you are pretty smart, so you should probably handle it the way you see fit.

I'm smart enough to realize that despite everything I've learned I don't have The One True Way. That's why I ask for explanations when people think I'm wrong. Saying I have horrible fashion sense because you read Vogue and Cosmo tells me what your source is, but doesn't tell me that green and orange clash.

You have more experience in or around courts than I do. Based on that you consider my approach incorrect. I would really like to know the details of why it's incorrect based on your experience.

[fullautovalmet76]

I'm smart enough to realize that despite everything I've learned I don't have The One True Way. That's why I ask for explanations when people think I'm wrong. Saying I have horrible fashion sense because you read Vogue and Cosmo tells me what your source is, but doesn't tell me that green and orange clash.

You have more experience in or around courts than I do. Based on that you consider my approach incorrect. I would really like to know the details of why it's incorrect based on your experience.

OK. For what it's worth:
I am not a lawyer. Please consult a top criminal defense attorney (preferably who was a former prosecutor) in your area for advice on how to handle the aftermath in a self defense shooting. The reason for this is they know how the system really works in your area.
I live in an area where law enforcement is very sympathetic to the rights of gun owners. The State Attorney's office tends to be in the middle and the courts tend to be in the middle as well. But if I lived a little south of my location, law enforcement is not as sympathetic and the prosecutors are more aggressive on self defense shootings. Knowing the "lay of the land" is very important should one find themselves in a situation like this. A former prosecutor turned defense attorney can tell you what will likely happen if this occurs. It's kind of like saying there are the rules, but here's how one plays by the rules.

I certainly understand that you want to help law enforcement, but you might be surprised at how you react in a situation like that. If you think you are going to be the most calm, rational, logical person you were before the incident, you are naive. The videos that Tom posted echoed what prosecutors told me when I worked for the courts: defendants tend to say too much and are stupid. At one of these incidents, law enforcement want to find the criminal(s) as quickly as possible. Even when you think you are "helping" them, they are constantly filtering what you say for any kind of BS. They are trained, and experience teaches them, to be very skeptical. So you may think you have an "open and shut case" and they will take you to jail anyway because they do not believe you based upon your statements and the evidence.

And lastly, I was involved in a self defense shooting almost three years ago; I posted my experience elsewhere on the forum. Though my "bad guy" was a drug dealer's pit bull, I knew there was the small possibility this could go against me if I said something without thinking. I got a lawyer and let him do the talking for me because I knew I was in no mental or emotional state to speak rationally and logically to the police at the time of the shooting. I knew I had done nothing wrong but I did not want to take any chances.

Like I said before, you should handle this the way you think is best for the area where you live. But I would strongly suggest you consult an attorney just to make sure you have touched all the bases. As great as Rob, Mike, and Michael are, they don't have a self defense series coming for what happens in the court room- which is where your fate will be decided after you survive the shooting.