Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Don Fischer
Your probably right but my impression over the years is that if you shoot someone the burden of proof is on you and even if you were right, you may still rot in jail. .....
|
Yes, but that's not new. That's been law for a very long time -- going back to the foundation of our legal system, the Common Law of England. And it's not going to be changing any time soon, if ever.
Actually, today the defendant claiming self defense doesn't have the burden of proof in all but a few States. But he still has the burden of producing sufficient evidence to establish each legal element of a self defense claim. Doing so shifts the burden of proof to the prosecutor and will get the defendant a jury instruction on self defense. But the more convincing the defendant's evidence the harder it will be for the prosecutor to overcome it.
An intentional act of violence against another human is, on its face. a crime. One escapes criminal (and civil) liability by being able to demonstrate that intentional act of violence was justified.