Just using a quick look up, and this is not up to date, but the average district in America sees 114 criminal cases a year as of 2018. Of those, truly, 99% settle out of court. That's 112.8 cases. That's 1.2 criminal cases that go to trial per district per state per year. That's not actually a lot for a DA or defense to claim to be experts.
First off, the scenario as described is hilariously vague. It's so vague (man attacks drunk teen with knife), that it may as well be Jason from Evilroy's earlier example (which...fits, honestly. Dumb, drunk teens are his MO). In which case, obviously you are allowed to protect yourself from the knife wielding maniac, duh. The problem is that, with this scenario at least, is the fact that there is usually a lot that happens that leads up to 'wild stabbing motions' (usually). Context matters, like who initiated the conflict, where did it happen, did any party have friends with them, were there witnesses, etc.
Well it depends on the state laws somewhat.
Some folks get off on the power of being in one. They think they're like in a movie or something. The antics some folks would pull off to get out are real though, I was in a jury duty hearing and thankfully they filled up before they got to me but there was this one lady who was trying to argue that since different people have different alcohol tolerance that there shouldn't be just a single legal limit of blood alcohol levels. The trial was apparently a drunk driving case. Either way that lady was a very normal-looking person up to that point but she turned complete psycho during her interview. But I guess she managed to avoid being picked so props to her lol.It's an old joke, but just remember, if you ever find yourself on trial: your fate lies in the hands of 12 people without the common sense to get out of jury duty.
God...I'm even more confused now.
Yes, obviously this is real life, where there aren't really any honor codes. There are, however, usually codes relating to 'reasonable force' and if you are drunk, can you be trusted to be reasonable, especially in the heat of the moment? Like, say you do successfully fight off your homicidal maniac, and have managed to disarm him/knock him out, but because you're drunk and hopped up on adrenaline, you continue to attack and end up killing him. But then, we've reached the zenith with this whole 'self defense or not' game, is that self defense is contextual, and as such can only be invoked in certain situations (and sometimes can be revoked if taken too far).
Well as the drunk teen attacked and as being drunk isn't an excuse for other criminal actions it's still self defence because the drunk teen acting like an ass and attacking you isn't your problem as such, you're not responsible for keeping him from doing it.
It depends on how far you go. If you punch him like a couple times more than the absolute minimum it's different than if you see the guy passed out and keep bashing his head on the ground dozens of times over the period of minutes just to be sure. But yeah it's subjective and this is why we have juries and judges and don't just make a no tolerance law.
He was running away from the first person he ended up shooting, who was sprinting after him and throwing things things at him.
What qualifies as 'reasonable force' is rather fluid since it is highly situational.
...keep going, that was section (2)(a), section (3)(c) is where the exception that applies in this case is found.
Considering this has already been clarified by the legislature, as I posted before, we take that section of the law for it's intention. Hunting. They wanted to negatively define what is definitely not hunting vs trying to positively define what is hunting to avoid cops from taking weapons near forests or whatever. So unless you're saying Kyle was out hunting, in the middle of Kenosha, in the middle of the night, during a riot, he's in violation of the law.
As far as I know, case law holds merely using hollowpoints are neither cause for establishing malice, nor an exaggerating factor. In civil court, it's another matter if the person using the firearm was handloading, but off-the-shelf hollowpoints...no, not so much.
Short version, yes.
Ah fair enough though I don't this the prosecutor here is playing by case law much as he's been pulling out the attempts to play on jury biases like the claims about violent video games or trying to bring up Kyle's social media and the specific name of the account to try and frame Kyle as a less virtuous person....
Yes or was driven to murder by the lifestyle he idolised or something like that. It's mad but it's a strategy I guess.
en.wikipedia.org
Legit question as Ive never been on jury duty - why would you want to get out of it? Its a civic duty and in theory an incredibly important part of our legal system. Its like wanting to get out of voting. Like shouldn't you want to participate?It's an old joke, but just remember, if you ever find yourself on trial: your fate lies in the hands of 12 people without the common sense to get out of jury duty.
