Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo
The key in the case you reference is that the woman left the room, got the gun and then re-engaged her husband. It also did not help that she lied about the shot she fired - claiming she fired at the ceiling when the bullet hit head-high in the door jam/wall.
The differences are critical. The case you reference there was no witness except the husband. In this there is a 3rd party witnessing him going after her with a knife - at which point she fires. Based on that account, he instigated the threat (similar to the TMvGZ case) and she reacted with lethal force.
Yes, she retrieved the gun, but did so AS he was continuing to verbally engage her - perhaps with threats, perhaps not. With his back to the camera, he could have shown her the blade and told her what he planned to do, etc. Then again, he could have been complaining about how she pulled into the parking spot. The thing is - she gets the gun and takes one step towards him - he moves forward - watch his leg - he PUTS it in the path of the gun - and intentionally moves up against her. If a knife was in his hand at that point - I don't blame her for pulling the trigger.
Maybe - maybe not. We can't see what he has in the hand he swings at her - he has SOMETHING, but you can't tell what. If its demonstrated to be a knife, I'd give her the benefit of the doubt to be sure. If the argument was him trying to get some tail - even more so.
We know this from the eyewitness and the injuries. If there was a knife as the witness claims, it could have been placed at her gut while he told her she didn't have the guts and he was going to have some fun with her. IF she is indicted then we will have to see where the evidence goes....A knife not seen on camera (and note how he almost always kept his left side away from the recording) but present and the testimony of "he came at her with a knife and she shot him" is pretty imminent - at least in my book.
Forgive the partial quote, but this is the crux of the discussion - stand your ground. She didn't escape or retreat. In a case where you feel threatened - should you be able to use lethal force without retreating?
Well unless there is more info than I am aware of, I don't know if she fired once or twice. If twice and it was a shotgun, it had to be a double barrel unless she retreated, reloaded and then shot him. Not enough on the tape to see that. Yes he jumped and they separated as he swung, but I am not convinced she actually did fire - much less hit him in the leg. He moves pretty well for a guy who took buckshot in one leg before the tape ends if that is the case. Given no audio and no details on the number of shots fired, its an assumption that the swing and fatal shot were preceded by another weapon discharge. Granted - it looks like it may have been, but there are indications on the take that no shot was fired initially - no visible concussion (pant leg movement, ground impact shards, dust flying etc considering it was pointed generally at the ground. No blood flying from the shooting "victim", and so on.).
The swing was warranted IF he was unarmed and she did in fact fire / shoot him in the leg. None of that is clearly proven or stated in the article or video. If she DIDN'T shoot fire (hitting him or not) then the swing was NOT warranted. Also - if he was armed with a knife then it was warranted anyway. I do have to take exception to the idea you raised that she had the "the bigger weapon" so by taking a step toward him it made her the threat. The "size of the weapon" doesn't matter - a lethal weapon is lethal - and that step forward could easily be seen as a way for her to clear her car enough to bring the weapon to bear. As such, it could be a reasonable act necessary for self defense (since we don't know if she saw the supposed knife). Notice she didn't raise it at him, its pointed toward the ground. To call that a threat doesn't make sense to me. He actually approaches, turns side on and sticks his leg / foot out - at least that is the way it appears.
Like the last case - we don't yet know all the facts - and what we do know is incomplete.
What is truly a sad commentary about this case is not just the loss of life for one family and the uncertainty and fear for another - it is that no one around the situation stepped in and helped calm the situation before it ever got to that point.
|