The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

**Mike Irwin** · May 30, 2001, 02:58 AM

Sorry, Madkiwi, it often doesn't work like that.

You can fear for your life, and you can use deadly force to protect yourself in the face of an imminent threat, but running after, and shooting someone in the back when they're down, is grounds for a manslaughter/murder charge and very possible conviction.

Right or wrong, there is tons of case law on this. The predicate fear defense is a tough one to construct and win, and there are a lot of women in prison whose attorneys tried it, and lost. Even when there is compelling, long-term abuse with high probability of more abuse in the future, it's an extremely tough case to win.

A good prosecutor would likely argue that the woman's actions weren't based on predicate fear (I THINK that's the correct term), but on... revenge.

A counter argument to that angle could be severe temporary emotional disturbance, again a real crap shoot, which the successful use of has as much to do with getting a sympathetic jury as it does the skill of your defense.

If the woman goes to trial, and if the facts of the case are basically those related in the articles, I'd say it's a 50/50 chance her walking/going to jail.

My gut feeling, though, says 60/40, with her going to jail more likely than not.

May 30, 2001, 02:58 AM	#13
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	Sorry, Madkiwi, it often doesn't work like that. You can fear for your life, and you can use deadly force to protect yourself in the face of an imminent threat, but running after, and shooting someone in the back when they're down, is grounds for a manslaughter/murder charge and very possible conviction. Right or wrong, there is tons of case law on this. The predicate fear defense is a tough one to construct and win, and there are a lot of women in prison whose attorneys tried it, and lost. Even when there is compelling, long-term abuse with high probability of more abuse in the future, it's an extremely tough case to win. A good prosecutor would likely argue that the woman's actions weren't based on predicate fear (I THINK that's the correct term), but on... revenge. A counter argument to that angle could be severe temporary emotional disturbance, again a real crap shoot, which the successful use of has as much to do with getting a sympathetic jury as it does the skill of your defense. If the woman goes to trial, and if the facts of the case are basically those related in the articles, I'd say it's a 50/50 chance her walking/going to jail. My gut feeling, though, says 60/40, with her going to jail more likely than not. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.