Using Deadly force in California.

[M I K]

We have 2 Labradors that sleep in the house at night. Believe me if someone tries to get in the house, the dogs have me awake. My Labs won't attack an intruder. In fact I have them trained to stand behind me if there is an intruder in the house. That way the muzzle blast won't hurt their ears.

And why waste time talking to a perp that has broken into your house? Just cap his ash before he shoots at you.

[tombinghamthegreat]

Hm. Here's an interesting thought.
Put decorative weapons all throughout your house. That way, anyone in your house always poses a lethal threat since they could always be reaching for a weapon.

a silly idea, i know, but meant to be satirical on the nature of the law.

that is like my house. not to mention it might remove any claims that the shooting was pre thoughtout since you could argue someone broke in, tried to kill me and i pulled a shotgun off the rack in fear for my life.

[ColdSteel]

Now, what if he runs out the door and I lay my gun down and give chase into the street, tackle him, he resists and I beat the sh*t out of him in order to apprehend him until the police arrive. Am I justified?

This is called a citizens arrest. Perfectly legal.

[the_natterjack]

LOL, don't worry about cleaning up blood and guts. Your insurance company will be the one paying for all that. You qualified to clean up a biohazard? If I shot someone I wouldn't expect to be back in my home for a week. Send the wife and kids to visit her grandparents.

[Satex]

Am I justified in my actions?

If the DA decides you weren't, then it would be up to a Jury.

[AJAX22]

Regardless of the initial outcome, never....NEVER....alter the original crime scene.

Should you "drag the body inside"...you will go to jail for a long time for manslaughter, or murder. Moving the body is the same as lying. Forensics will easily and quickly know you did.

"Put a gun or knife in his hand" will also get you a manslaughter, or murder conviction. Forensics will easily and quickly prove you lied.

Giving first aid to the, now, shot up suspect may also result in a premeditated charge. Forensics, or qualified medical personnel, will know the results of body movement in the application of first aid needs. Rolling the bad guy over to plug his newly leaking holes (or moving him from the confines of the doorway), could also go in your favor when the prosecution has no answer to the medical examination of the evidence, that you did all you could to not only stop a crime in process, but rendered aid in the aftermath of your justifiable actions.....

....just don't bet on it.

Yes Forensics can tell if you move a body (its very, very obvious to trained personell, the cloathing gives it away)

Altering a crime scene is a felony and should never ever be done, but I think too much credit is being given to forensic science in this particular case.

if an unregistered gun with ammunition which does not match that of any which you have in your house (different callibre, different lot number, different make etc.) that has no prints (on the mag, bullets internal components, under the grips etc.) and has been stored in a sealed bag to prevent fibers or other trace evidence from accumulating on it were to be found near the suspect or partially under/in the suspects hand (or even sitting on the counter with the magazine removed and the slide locked back), it would be damn near impossible for anyone to prove that you put it there and that he didn't bring it.

It would even be explainable why your fingerprints were on the gun, you took it out of the guys hand so that if he was faking he wouldn't kill you with it.

I'm not saying that its a good idea (and I personally would never do it, and strongly would advise against it), I just don't see how anyone could prove otherwise.

[tyrist]

No, once he has broken off the confrontation and you pursue him you are now the agressor.

Not smart to do but legal....force can be used to affect arrest.

[BillCA]

if an unregistered gun with ammunition which does not match that of any which you have in your house (different callibre, different lot number, different make etc.) that has no prints (on the mag, bullets internal components, under the grips etc.) and has been stored in a sealed bag to prevent fibers or other trace evidence from accumulating on it were to be found near the suspect or partially under/in the suspects hand (or even sitting on the counter with the magazine removed and the slide locked back), it would be damn near impossible for anyone to prove that you put it there and that he didn't bring it.

It would even be explainable why your fingerprints were on the gun, you took it out of the guys hand so that if he was faking he wouldn't kill you with it.

Oh, the naive thinking here.

If the forensics team finds a gun that is so "dry cleaned" that it lacks fingerprints, stray fibers, dust, lint or bodily products (hairs, skin cells, dandruff) it'll raise a bunch of red flags. BG's just don't keep their guns that clean. And in your scenario, if the BG isn't wearing gloves it'll be even harder to explain.

DO NOT ever alter evidence at a crime scene. If your intruder's eyes are in the *tilt* position, he won't argue with your telling the PD you thought he was going to kill you.

As pointed out above, an intruder can turn his back on you in the time it takes you to pull the trigger. He moves after being told to stop, you interpret the threat and squeeze, but in the meantime (1/4 sec) he's turned his back and your round strikes home. This is documented by Force Science News in one of their articles about police shootings. But it is not carte blanche to shoot people who are no threat to you (fleeing).

[ByTheNumbers]

As pointed out above, an intruder can turn his back on you in the time it takes you to pull the trigger.

I agree that a "drop gun" would raise lots of questions because of the total lack of fingerprints or other trace evidence on the internal parts, even if you pressed it into the BG's hands to get his fingerprints on the outside, like you often see on TV or in the movies. Especially since most BG's probably don't wear holsters, you'd expect to find lots of lint and skin particles from being kept in a pocket or a waistband.

Regarding the quoted statement above, Joe Horn in Texas was widely criticized for shooting those two burglars "in the back". I guess no one but Horn knows for sure, but I wonder if he was aiming at their front but by the time he pulled the trigger, they had already started to pass him or turn away? I mean, he said he feared for his life, and that undercover officer who pulled up to the house said that they were running towards Horn across his lawn and then were veering away when they were shot. Anyway, I think the Horn case illustrates this possibility that you mention. Things happen very fast in a real situation and what is left behind may not accurately reflect how things were that caused you to pull the trigger.

[AJAX22]

Oh, the naive thinking here.

If the forensics team finds a gun that is so "dry cleaned" that it lacks fingerprints, stray fibers, dust, lint or bodily products (hairs, skin cells, dandruff) it'll raise a bunch of red flags. BG's just don't keep their guns that clean. And in your scenario, if the BG isn't wearing gloves it'll be even harder to explain.

DO NOT ever alter evidence at a crime scene. If your intruder's eyes are in the *tilt* position, he won't argue with your telling the PD you thought he was going to kill you.

As pointed out above, an intruder can turn his back on you in the time it takes you to pull the trigger. He moves after being told to stop, you interpret the threat and squeeze, but in the meantime (1/4 sec) he's turned his back and your round strikes home. This is documented by Force Science News in one of their articles about police shootings. But it is not carte blanche to shoot people who are no threat to you (fleeing).

I understand that it would raise red flags, however lack of evidence is not evidence of anything. Any dead guy on the floor of your apartment is going to raise red flags.

I'm not saying that anyone should alter evidence at a crime scene. Its a felony, and is just a horrible idea.

I just have a problem with attributing mystical powers to the forensic examiners.

Forensic science is not as all knowing as people seem to think.

[1911su16b870]

Reasonable force can be used to:
1. Effect an arrest
2. Prevent escape
3. Overcome resistance

Do not tamper with the scene or evidence. Call 911, request EMS and the Police, call your attorney and use your right to not incriminate yourself.