TexasCHLforum.com

crazy2medic wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:40 pm

Oldgringo wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:16 pm

crazy2medic wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 3:45 pm Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6!

totally; however, in this instance the shooter was not under attack, was she?

True, but what kind of sorry society are we if nobody comes to the aid of those that hold the thin blue line!
I for one will go to an officers aid what ever the consequences!

Keep us posted. We will want to know how that works out for you, et al, in the event of.......

This is from one of my posts earlier in this thread, but since questions about Indiana law on liability for self-defense/defense of others have come up again:

ELB wrote: ↑Fri Apr 20, 2018 10:08 am
Indiana law does appear to have protection for people who defend themselves, according to the woman's lawyer:

"Where a person uses reasonable force in self-defense or the defense of a third person they cannot be held, quote, 'in any legal jeopardy whatsoever,' end quote. And any legal jeopardy whatsoever unquestionably includes civil liability or being a defendant in a civil lawsuit," said Relford.

...and he hopes to get the case dismissed early on.
http://www.wlwt.com/article/women-don-t ... c/19864383

Scuttlebutt on Indiana forum is that the family could not get a local lawyer to take the case so went to Cincinnati to find a firm that would.

Once again, the woman's GoFundMe page for legal costs is here, if you are so inclined: https://www.gofundme.com/kystie039s-best-defense

ETA: IC 35-41-3-2:

"No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary."

Thanks ELB.

"Reasonable means necessary" language usually involves a determination by a jury. But, again, I have no knowledge of how they would resolve those issues under Indiana law. Having to try that case would be very costly.

I hope her lawyer can figure out a way to get it dismissed on summary judgment so as to avoid a trial.

crazy2medic wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:40 pm

Oldgringo wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:16 pm

crazy2medic wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 3:45 pm Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6!

totally; however, in this instance the shooter was not under attack, was she?

True, but what kind of sorry society are we if nobody comes to the aid of those that hold the thin blue line!
I for one will go to an officers aid what ever the consequences!

Maybe the kind where the thin blue line won't pay for the lawyer to defend the woman who saved one of their lives?

BBYC wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:41 pm

crazy2medic wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:40 pm

Oldgringo wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:16 pm

crazy2medic wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 3:45 pm Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6!

totally; however, in this instance the shooter was not under attack, was she?

True, but what kind of sorry society are we if nobody comes to the aid of those that hold the thin blue line!
I for one will go to an officers aid what ever the consequences!

Maybe the kind where the thin blue line won't pay for the lawyer to defend the woman who saved one of their lives?

Ya, they are named together in the suit. Not really sure why they didn't pursue the defense together....

BBYC wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:41 pm ...
Maybe the kind where the thin blue line won't pay for the lawyer to defend the woman who saved one of their lives?

The GoFundMe page for her was started by a police officer who didn't even know her.

PriestTheRunner wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 1:34 pm Ya, they are named together in the suit. Not really sure why they didn't pursue the defense together....

Because their cases are not the same, and both being defendants doesn't necessarily make them genuine allies. Their defenses might be very different. For example the DNR lawyers may argue that the DNR and the conservation officer had no input or control over the woman's decision to shoot and therefore are in no way responsible for the subject's death, and further therefore should be dropped from the case entirely (leaving the woman as the sole defendant).

Because the DNR is the deep-pockets defendant in this case, I suspect they are the real target. However, the plaintiff can't get to the DNR (especially with the conspiracy claim) except through the conservation officer and the woman who defended him*. So they sue all three, allege conspiracy and whatnot, and try to put the defendants in the position of having to settle to make the case go away. Again, one or the other of the defendants may choose to settle separately, whereupon the plaintiff's would agree to drop them from the case and focus on the surviving defendant.

*Also, I believe that in a civil case such as this one, the plaintiff can't later add, or will find it hard to add, defendants to the case, so they sue everybody even remotely connected. That's why in medical malpractice cases the lawyers go through the medical files and sue most every name they find. It's better for the plaintiff to make defendants show why they are not connected to the case upfront, rather than for the plaintiffs to have to argue later why they should be added. Maybe we have a civil lawyer who can chime in on the correctness of this.

Maybe they should countersue and claim a conspiracy to murder law enforcement officers. Make the bad guy famly show they weren't party to the plan to ambush and kill a cop.

Prayers sent what a horrible thing to have to deal with just cause you did right!

From the gofundme site for Kystie Jaehnen:

Those that are following my updates I have received word that the lawsuit has been dropped and there is no chance of refiling. Per Kystie’s request the remaining funds will be held by the Laughery valley FOP Lodge 146 benevolent fund as well as a donation to St Jude’s Children’s Hospital. I will be shutting down the account tomorrow. I want to thank everyone for their support of the police and Kystie. Also check out House Bill 1284 in Indiana and if you don’t have this provision in your state I would suggest you copy it and give to your representative. God Bless

https://www.gofundme.com/kystie039s-bes ... orters-v5b

Indiana Legislators are also considering a beefed up civil immunity during current session.

Good thing I live in Texas !!

ELB wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:46 am

rtschl wrote:Though it still may require an attorney if civil case filed, it really makes me thankful for Texas and CPRC 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY.
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified in Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant's use of force or deadly force, as applicable.

I like Florida's civil immunity better. If you are sued and win because you were engaged in self-defense/defense of another, you are entitled to reasonable legal fees, including income compensation.

This still does not mean that a lawsuit can not be filed. If a civil lawsuit is filed, it will still take action of the court to find in favor of the defendant for immunity from civil liability.

twomillenium wrote: ↑Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:27 pm

ELB wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:46 am

rtschl wrote:Though it still may require an attorney if civil case filed, it really makes me thankful for Texas and CPRC 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY.
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified in Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant's use of force or deadly force, as applicable.

I like Florida's civil immunity better. If you are sued and win because you were engaged in self-defense/defense of another, you are entitled to reasonable legal fees, including income compensation.

This still does not mean that a lawsuit can not be filed. ...

Didn’t say it couldn’t be filed. Just that I like Florida’s law better.

From the GoFundme page https://www.gofundme.com/kystie039s-best-defense

Those that are following my updates I have received word that the lawsuit has been dropped and there is no chance of refiling. Per Kystie’s request the remaining funds will be held by the Laughery valley FOP Lodge 146 benevolent fund as well as a donation to St Jude’s Children’s Hospital. I will be shutting down the account tomorrow. I want to thank everyone for their support of the police and Kystie. Also check out House Bill 1284 in Indiana and if you don’t have this provision in your state I would suggest you copy it and give to your representative. God Bless

So, the lawsuit was "dropped." But, I have questions. Was a monetary settlement paid by any party ( I understand the good samaritan could not afford to pay anything) in return for dropping the lawsuit? Often confidential settlements are reached in return for dismissal of the suit. Would hate to see a dime paid out on this one.

Oldgringo wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 7:25 am

crazy2medic wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:40 pm

Oldgringo wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:16 pm

crazy2medic wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 3:45 pm Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6!

totally; however, in this instance the shooter was not under attack, was she?

True, but what kind of sorry society are we if nobody comes to the aid of those that hold the thin blue line!
I for one will go to an officers aid what ever the consequences!

Keep us posted. We will want to know how that works out for you, et al, in the event of.......

Looks like it worked out well for the one willing to help the other person.