TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.kctv5.com/story/22407866/sho ... sibly-shot

The wife was home alone since her husband was out doing an errand.

3 home invaders jiggle her front and back doors, then don blue gloves prior to kicking in the door.

Wife fires one round from .38 revolver through the door and hits 1 of the 3 BG's in the chest.

The wounded man is taken to the hospital. Arrests are made.

I had to grin at the video where the proud husband recounts the incident.
They had been robbed some years before, but this time they were armed and had range time
under their belts.

Glad the wife is OK.

SIA

Glad they are safe and hope the others involved are rounded up quickly .

I would not have done the interview.

jmra wrote:I would not have done the interview.

Mouth shut, move on.

Hopefully there will not be any retaliation. Or legal consequences.

Somehow we need a memo to go out to all gun owners. If you are in a battle for your life and you have to shoot a man. Give an initial statement that you feared for your life because that person was doing X. Then state that you wish to speak to a lawyer and all further statements and interviews need to come from that lawyer.

glock27 wrote:

mamabearCali wrote:Somehow we need a memo to go out to all gun owners. If you are in a battle for your life and you have to shoot a man. Give an initial statement that you feared for your life because that person was doing X. Then state that you wish to speak to a lawyer and all further statements and interviews need to come from that lawyer.

Is it even wise to give any type of statement? Id rather get yaken into custody for a few nights than slip up and say somthing wrong on a statement report of a good shoot
Jmho

Yes, IMHO, it is wise to give an initial statement to the police regarding the threat you perceived and your intent to sign a complaint against the (robber, assailant, etc.). This establishes you as the victim and puts the police on the investigation path with that perspective.

Now, once that's done, you can help point out evidence such as shell casings, etc. but make no further statements.
Pointing out evidence is to make sure its recovered and recovered in the proper location.
This may be especially important if the shooting occurs outside where wind, rain, other cars, or bystanders might tamper with it.

The location of shell casings will help to establish your position when the rounds were discharged.

After that, clam up. Anything you say will be taken down, but maybe not in the exact fashion in which you said it. What you say is important, but also the intent with which you say it. This may not be captured by the investigator and thus important information or context could be lost. The full information is only legitimate if its WHAT you said and HOW you said it.

Your attorney should control the flow of information after you give that initial statement.

You never know what some zealous, but mis-guided DA or ADA might do with what you said in the heat of the moment. It's that old "can be used against you in the court of law"; but it cannot be used "for" you....I've heard that's "hearsay"; makes no sense to me.

I ain't no lawyer and this is only my opinion.....

LabRat

A good thing is that it was not the shooter that was doing the tv interview.

LabRat wrote:

glock27 wrote:

mamabearCali wrote:Somehow we need a memo to go out to all gun owners. If you are in a battle for your life and you have to shoot a man. Give an initial statement that you feared for your life because that person was doing X. Then state that you wish to speak to a lawyer and all further statements and interviews need to come from that lawyer.

Is it even wise to give any type of statement? Id rather get yaken into custody for a few nights than slip up and say somthing wrong on a statement report of a good shoot
Jmho

Yes, IMHO, it is wise to give an initial statement to the police regarding the threat you perceived and your intent to sign a complaint against the (robber, assailant, etc.). This establishes you as the victim and puts the police on the investigation path with that perspective.

Now, once that's done, you can help point out evidence such as shell casings, etc. but make no further statements.
Pointing out evidence is to make sure its recovered and recovered in the proper location.
This may be especially important if the shooting occurs outside where wind, rain, other cars, or bystanders might tamper with it.

The location of shell casings will help to establish your position when the rounds were discharged.

After that, clam up. Anything you say will be taken down, but maybe not in the exact fashion in which you said it. What you say is important, but also the intent with which you say it. This may not be captured by the investigator and thus important information or context could be lost. The full information is only legitimate if its WHAT you said and HOW you said it.

Your attorney should control the flow of information after you give that initial statement.

You never know what some zealous, but mis-guided DA or ADA might do with what you said in the heat of the moment. It's that old "can be used against you in the court of law"; but it cannot be used "for" you....I've heard that's "hearsay"; makes no sense to me.

I ain't no lawyer and this is only my opinion.....

LabRat

Well, I am and that is my opinion as well.

It is overwhelmingly tempting to feel like, because you are innocent, an explanation will clear things up and get it behind you. In many instances it does, but if the circumstances are not exactly perfect, if there is a Inspector Clouseau involved, or a Assistant DA looking to "make his bones" or any number of other scenarios, you might be talking yourself into a heap of trouble. For one thing, your statements can be used as evidence. What your lawyer says cannot. Moreover, anyone who has ever played the childhood game of whispering a famous saying around a circle knows that statements are not always heard or recorded correctly. What starts out as "Remember the Alamo" sometimes comes out as "You may fire when ready, Gridley!" or some such. Moreover when the recently deceased perp's friends and family get involved, there is very little limit to their imagination. Your statements will be measured against the physical scene, marks on the wall, angles, time lines etc. and your first excited utterances to the police must match up EXACTLY, or there will be discrepancies

It is best to say only that you were in fear of your life and shot to stop the threat. Let your lawyer talk you out of the jam once the facts are known, analyzed, compared, discrepancies resolved, nerves calmed, reflections furthered.

The first liar never has a chance. Let that be the other guy.

I am actually shocked at how much cain is raised by wounded/killed perps families after their family member has been neutralized as a threat to society.

LabRat wrote:

glock27 wrote:

mamabearCali wrote:Somehow we need a memo to go out to all gun owners. If you are in a battle for your life and you have to shoot a man. Give an initial statement that you feared for your life because that person was doing X. Then state that you wish to speak to a lawyer and all further statements and interviews need to come from that lawyer.

Is it even wise to give any type of statement? Id rather get yaken into custody for a few nights than slip up and say somthing wrong on a statement report of a good shoot
Jmho

Yes, IMHO, it is wise to give an initial statement to the police regarding the threat you perceived and your intent to sign a complaint against the (robber, assailant, etc.). This establishes you as the victim and puts the police on the investigation path with that perspective.

Now, once that's done, you can help point out evidence such as shell casings, etc. but make no further statements.
Pointing out evidence is to make sure its recovered and recovered in the proper location.
This may be especially important if the shooting occurs outside where wind, rain, other cars, or bystanders might tamper with it.

The location of shell casings will help to establish your position when the rounds were discharged.

After that, clam up. Anything you say will be taken down, but maybe not in the exact fashion in which you said it. What you say is important, but also the intent with which you say it. This may not be captured by the investigator and thus important information or context could be lost. The full information is only legitimate if its WHAT you said and HOW you said it.

Your attorney should control the flow of information after you give that initial statement.

You never know what some zealous, but mis-guided DA or ADA might do with what you said in the heat of the moment. It's that old "can be used against you in the court of law"; but it cannot be used "for" you....I've heard that's "hearsay"; makes no sense to me.

I ain't no lawyer and this is only my opinion.....

LabRat

I would not talk to the media.

Once the LEO's arrive, they will secure the scene, which may include securing the shooter. While each jurisdiction may do this somewhat different, this is how we have done it. You will be asked what happened, but this is not the main interview. They do need to know if there are any more outstanding suspects, ect. For a OIS we refer to this as a safety statement. Almost immediately the LEO's should be removing you and everybody else not involved in the actual investigation from the crime scene. Later after they interview you, (with your attorney present if you desire) they MAY ask you to do a walk through. This is basically walking them through the events back at the crime scene. Some shootings may need that, while others do not based on what they found at the scene, ect. Providing a statement is one's choice.

As far as shell casings and stuff things get moved or taken. During my last OIS, which was fluid and the location changed after the gun fire, people actually went out and took the shell casings as souvenirs before a crime scene could be set up

My goal is virtually always to fly under the radar and I don't care to speak to the media (not that they want to) or even a "pollster" on the telephone.

Even forum posting make me a bit itchy!

Half kidding it makes me think of when Steve Martin made the phone book in "The Jerk" and was randomly selected to be shot by the sniper....

I am in the minority, just as I tell each of my CHL students, but you have two golden opportunities: 1) your 911 call; and 2) your statement to the first responding officer. I'm not saying more here, and I'm not suggesting you should tell your life's story. But I've read some really terrible advice that ranges from "lawyering up" to remaining totally mute, to telling the officer to "kiss my foot, I know my rights and I'm not talking."

DPS Lt. Derrick (Ret.) taught part of a CHL Instructor renewal course and he related a story about a man shooting and killing an unarmed man outside his (shooter's) sister's home. He was no-billed in Travis County of all places, because he told Lt. Derrick what happened before Austin PD arrived.

It's your call.
Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I am in the minority, just as I tell each of my CHL students, but you have two golden opportunities: 1) your 911 call; and 2) your statement to the first responding officer. I'm not saying more here, and I'm not suggesting you should tell your life's story. But I've read some really terrible advice that ranges from "lawyering up" to remaining totally mute, to telling the officer to "kiss my foot, I know my rights and I'm not talking."

DPS Lt. Derrick (Ret.) taught part of a CHL Instructor renewal course and he related a story about a man shooting and killing an unarmed man outside his (shooter's) sister's home. He was no-billed in Travis County of all places, because he told Lt. Derrick what happened before Austin PD arrived.

It's your call.
Chas.

I can see "how" you respond to the first officers on the scene can set a tone as to how they might consider your story as plausible or not.

Sounds like the shooter was just lucky that DPS arrived first.

I sure would hate for it to be luck of the draw as to which agency responded.
It might be well worth knowing the track record of your particular area police with regards to CHL holders.

In my case, I might have to consider approximately 8 different agencies depending on where in the Carrollton area an "incident" might occur. Not all would respond, of course; Carrollton spills over 3 counties. That's a lot of police agencies to keep track of.

I would suggest that when determining whether to speak or not, be sure to use common courtsey, maybe even apologetic tones; but keep the words to a bare minimum to keep yourself safe.

LabRat

LabRat wrote: I would suggest that when determining whether to speak or not, be sure to use common courtsey, maybe even apologetic tones; but keep the words to a bare minimum to keep yourself safe.

LabRat

And make sure to record the conversation.
I use this free app... Tape-A-Talk
There are other ways to do so..