Have we had a thread on the Apple River stabbing?
| costumed bearded ape | 04/09/24 | | lime school | 04/09/24 | | costumed bearded ape | 04/09/24 | | plum trailer park | 04/09/24 | | Stimulating station electric furnace | 04/09/24 | | Orange Kitty Cat Indian Lodge | 04/09/24 | | Hilarious Coffee Pot Area | 04/09/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/10/24 | | Bat-shit-crazy kitchen | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | Stirring space | 04/11/24 | | frozen really tough guy idiot | 04/09/24 | | mildly autistic nudist sound barrier principal's office | 04/09/24 | | beady-eyed clear skinny woman police squad | 04/09/24 | | Stimulating station electric furnace | 04/09/24 | | Mint exciting library | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | Stimulating station electric furnace | 04/09/24 | | trip navy center giraffe | 04/09/24 | | Nighttime bat shit crazy halford | 04/09/24 | | lime school | 04/09/24 | | bonkers contagious alpha community account | 04/09/24 | | mildly autistic nudist sound barrier principal's office | 04/09/24 | | dashing french chef address | 04/09/24 | | charismatic cruel-hearted church | 04/11/24 | | Flatulent slimy stain | 04/11/24 | | Nighttime bat shit crazy halford | 04/09/24 | | dashing french chef address | 04/09/24 | | Nighttime bat shit crazy halford | 04/09/24 | | costumed bearded ape | 04/10/24 | | Pontificating Boyish Casino | 04/09/24 | | trip navy center giraffe | 04/09/24 | | wonderful sienna lay | 04/09/24 | | french gunner office | 04/09/24 | | green aromatic dilemma | 04/09/24 | | beady-eyed clear skinny woman police squad | 04/09/24 | | lime school | 04/09/24 | | green aromatic dilemma | 04/09/24 | | beady-eyed clear skinny woman police squad | 04/09/24 | | iridescent pit | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | Dun shitlib | 04/10/24 | | Naked soul-stirring feces gas station | 04/11/24 | | dashing french chef address | 04/09/24 | | Swashbuckling insane mexican | 04/11/24 | | Cracking range | 04/11/24 | | beady-eyed clear skinny woman police squad | 04/11/24 | | lime school | 04/09/24 | | Vibrant Sepia Lettuce Plaza | 04/09/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | Frum Mustard Location | 04/09/24 | | costumed bearded ape | 04/09/24 | | lime school | 04/09/24 | | costumed bearded ape | 04/09/24 | | green aromatic dilemma | 04/09/24 | | costumed bearded ape | 04/09/24 | | costumed bearded ape | 04/09/24 | | razzmatazz ticket booth | 04/10/24 | | adventurous turquoise incel | 04/09/24 | | beady-eyed clear skinny woman police squad | 04/09/24 | | Naked soul-stirring feces gas station | 04/11/24 | | diverse pearl pistol | 04/09/24 | | Hilarious Coffee Pot Area | 04/09/24 | | mildly autistic nudist sound barrier principal's office | 04/10/24 | | Odious Telephone | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | mildly autistic nudist sound barrier principal's office | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/10/24 | | Pontificating Boyish Casino | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | lime school | 04/10/24 | | Stirring space | 04/11/24 | | Black galvanic puppy | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | Black galvanic puppy | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | sooty up-to-no-good base | 04/12/24 | | drunken spot | 04/11/24 | | Naked soul-stirring feces gas station | 04/11/24 | | Black galvanic puppy | 04/11/24 | | Olive orchestra pit azn | 04/10/24 | | Metal Gay Tanning Salon Background Story | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | beady-eyed clear skinny woman police squad | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | Olive orchestra pit azn | 04/10/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/10/24 | | Bat-shit-crazy kitchen | 04/10/24 | | Talented Legal Warrant School Cafeteria | 04/11/24 | | deep lemon abode | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/10/24 | | Brindle chest-beating heaven toaster | 04/10/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | know-it-all razzle foreskin locale | 04/11/24 | | marvelous immigrant state | 04/11/24 | | Coral Bisexual Antidepressant Drug Love Of Her Life | 04/11/24 | | bonkers contagious alpha community account | 04/11/24 | | marvelous immigrant state | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | marvelous immigrant state | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | avocado heady regret chapel | 04/11/24 | | costumed bearded ape | 04/11/24 | | Olive orchestra pit azn | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | costumed bearded ape | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | costumed bearded ape | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | Racy Stage Haunted Graveyard | 04/11/24 | | green aromatic dilemma | 04/11/24 | | Racy Stage Haunted Graveyard | 04/11/24 | | green aromatic dilemma | 04/11/24 | | Racy Stage Haunted Graveyard | 04/11/24 | | beady-eyed clear skinny woman police squad | 04/11/24 | | Racy Stage Haunted Graveyard | 04/11/24 | | green aromatic dilemma | 04/11/24 | | big cobalt cuck | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | costumed bearded ape | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | Odious Telephone | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Odious Telephone | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/12/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/12/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/12/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/12/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/12/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/12/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/12/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/12/24 | | Stirring space | 04/11/24 | | Electric high-end market | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | marvelous immigrant state | 04/11/24 | | Stirring space | 04/11/24 | | Stimulating station electric furnace | 04/11/24 | | Olive orchestra pit azn | 04/11/24 | | Racy Stage Haunted Graveyard | 04/11/24 | | Stirring space | 04/11/24 | | vigorous roast beef forum | 04/11/24 | | marvelous immigrant state | 04/11/24 | | marvelous immigrant state | 04/11/24 | | Racy Stage Haunted Graveyard | 04/11/24 | | Bistre floppy pozpig | 04/11/24 | | Bistre floppy pozpig | 04/11/24 | | Stirring space | 04/11/24 | | Bistre floppy pozpig | 04/11/24 | | Pontificating Boyish Casino | 04/12/24 | | frozen really tough guy idiot | 04/12/24 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: April 9th, 2024 6:35 PM Author: costumed bearded ape
https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1777187275144900621?t=3f-x_Ppwbngsz7upLv5N2A&s=19
All these kids do deserve to die because of their incomprehensible yelling, but not sure if this guy was in reasonable fear of substantial bodily harm. Maybe I would acquit because of the water/drowning factor, but I think he could have just left at some point.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47568783) |
Date: April 9th, 2024 6:44 PM Author: beady-eyed clear skinny woman police squad
I posted this video yesterday in a tangentially related thread
https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1777377832248758650
It's worth a watch, the star witness implodes pretty spectacularly
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47568821) |
Date: April 9th, 2024 6:52 PM Author: Stimulating station electric furnace
It sounded like the boomer mostly started the altercation over a misunderstanding. He thought one of the teens had stolen his friend's phone he was snorkling for. Then he charged at them and stuck around in the middle of the group while they were shouting at him to leave until things went south and one of the teens got physical. That caused it to escalate into an actual fight and he stabbed them
Some kind of manslaughter "feels" right but idk what the law says. He basically started an altercation drunkenly, continued to escalate, then killed someone and stabbed multiple others. The law probably shouldn't be designed to justify or incentivize that kind of behavior.
He also just got back in his group's tube flotilla and continued down the river while a guy was bleeding out in the water, and tossed the knife in the woods (they found it).
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47568853) |
|
Date: April 9th, 2024 6:59 PM Author: trip navy center giraffe
looking at the video the boomer looks like the instigator solely because of his "misunderstanding", he could have avoided this situation entirely had he been a normal human and the kids started recording specifically because he was a psycho
im 100% for zoomer stabbings tho and the 90iq boomer jury will 100% side w him as well so no one who watched the video
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47568871) |
Date: April 9th, 2024 7:13 PM Author: beady-eyed clear skinny woman police squad
It's funny how some cases get way more attention than others. A few years ago there was a somewhat high profile murder in this same county, yet there were zero news stories done about the ultimate resolution of the case.
Back in 2020, Wisconsin lifted its pandemic restrictions before Minnesota. This led to a flood of Minnesotans pouring into Hudson, Wisconsin to party at the bars there (Hudson is basically just an exurb of the Twin Cities). It was absolute pandemonium in Hudson for a while. In the chaos, a group of blacks stabbed a white kid to death.
Shontez Cole took a plea deal and got 9 years. Another dude pled to battery and got just a couple months. There was no media coverage of the case after they got arrested.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47568899) |
Date: April 10th, 2024 3:32 PM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
watching the video twice, it looks like they pushed him first and slapped him around 1:47, stabs at 1:53, continues to get accosted and pushed again at 2:03, then the realize the guy is stabbed and everything goes nuts.
this guy shouldn't be convicted. he's being surrounded by a bunch of teens who started attacking him first. the whole altercation lasted 10 seconds. in a heated moment like that it must feel like an instant. all i know is from this video, so i guess it depends on how much he "started it" by coming over first? he was helping someone look for a phone or something?
either way, a pocket knife against a group of 5 teens attacking you and shouting seems very reasonable. reasonable he could have feared for his life after being pushed into the water and slapped while you're under. especially in the heat of the moment like that. if i was surrounded by 5 people who were younger and seemed strong i'd grab whatever weapon was nearby. and it's not like you'd really expect to kill someone with a pocket knife.
not a legal analysis, just what i think regardless of the law.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47571144) |
|
Date: April 10th, 2024 3:43 PM Author: Electric high-end market
Tioctcr
He does not seem like the aggressor in the video. The guy taking the vid got caught in a lie when he told detectives that he had seen the man taking pictures of underage girls and called him a pedo. But in testimony admitted that he had not seen such a thing.
This is the same way Crispus Attucks whipped a crowd into a frenzy and started pelting the British soldiers with rocks for no goddamn reason. +1 Cpt. Preston auto acquit. History just repeats whereby baboons can't help escalating situations. The White thing to do is let the man go free.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47571197) |
Date: April 10th, 2024 3:43 PM Author: Black galvanic puppy
This is one of those "legal" "cases" where trying to apply the "objective standard" of "the law" flowchart is just goofy and silly
Everyone in this video is essentially worthless to the rest of society outside of being a slave in an Amazon warehouse. It's incoherent and pointless to try to punish this random subhuman prole for semi-accidentally killing another random subhuman prole. None of these people's lives matter at all
The appropriate restitution is for the killer to pay a reasonable civil monetary penalty to the victim's family. Each of these people's lives is worth about 50 grand. I don't know how many people died in this but the killer should be ordered to pay each of them 50 grand and then the judge should declare the matter settled and over with
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47571196)
|
Date: April 10th, 2024 11:39 PM Author: Brindle chest-beating heaven toaster
Can they prosecute him for “reckless endangerment” or something because one kid he stabbed wasn’t actually attacking Miu. Or can they prosecute for “instigating” because he lunged at the tubes? Or for lying to the police so much?
Can they prosecute any of the other instigators?
Heartbreaking for the boy and his family.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47572789) |
Date: April 11th, 2024 11:04 AM Author: marvelous immigrant state
There's a few important details you can't really see in the video.
1. Multiple witnesses say he punched one of the chicks in the face before anyone attacked him. This is when the camera pans just before he gets jumped. If that's true, he instigated and can't claim self defense, at least not until he retreats. He had an opportunity to retreat before at least some of the stabbings.
2. There's a still frame from the video shown at trial with him holding the deployed knife already when talking to the chicks. It's a bit confusing, but seems like he had the knife out before getting knocked down and before any of the boys touched him. The chicks had grabbed his arm and pushed his shoulder at that point. Makes it seem like he was planning on stabbing before there was any reasonable fear.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47573722) |
Date: April 11th, 2024 11:31 AM Author: avocado heady regret chapel
self-defense muddied by his terrible behavior after. he not only threw away the knife, he lied and lied to cops, denying everything, then when confronted with facts, lied some more
some crime in there.
but if you get pushed down into water and then struck while down by a crowd of youths, you have a pretty good s-d case imo
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47573867) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 1:50 PM Author: Electric high-end market
The knife wound to the surviving guy who got stabbed was incredibly gnarly. It was a deep wound a foot long. And that's the guy who didn't die. This wasn't some small knife. If had to have been a substantial combat weapon.
https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/video/knife-used-in-apple-river-stabbings-shown-during-nicolae-mius-trial/
Looks like a 3.5" blade from Walmart. Upon the further review it appears to have a bulky handle larger than the blade itself. You can get a good grip on this thing. It's probably over 7" when fully extended (erect).
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574356) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 4:48 PM Author: costumed bearded ape
If it was a 3.5" blade, that is not a small knife. Knifes are fucking dangerous. That's one of their functions.
You sound like a guy saying he only shot him with a .22.
I would absolutely bet on the boomer with the knife. Stab one and the others are pussying out.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47575068) |
Date: April 11th, 2024 12:14 PM Author: Racy Stage Haunted Graveyard
That kike should spend the rest of his life getting spit roasted by niggers in jail
Also he should be punished for what he did to those teens
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574069) |
Date: April 11th, 2024 12:48 PM Author: beady-eyed clear skinny woman police squad
"The jury found Miu guilty of one count of first-degree reckless homicide, four counts of first-degree recklessly endangering safety and one count of battery."
Not guilty on the intentional homicide charge
https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/nicolae-miu-apple-river-stabbing-trial-verdict/
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574144) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 1:19 PM Author: Electric high-end market
Defense attorney says self defense is a community standard, not black and white.
The question is whether his response was proportional. Heat of the moment is very hard to convey to juries. He also may have contributed however slightly to the escalation, made no attempt to retreat or deescalate. Whipped the knife out fast maybe before it was necessary. Discarding the knife and lying to police didn't help him.
Not saying I agree but I can see how the jury reached those verdict.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574250) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 1:53 PM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
it doesn't matter when he whipped out the blade and the response was absolutely proportionate. the issues here are
1) did he have an actual and honest belief in imminent death or great bodily harm
2) was that belief reasonable
3) absence of a reasonable means to retreat
considering the attitude of the kids laughing at him, pushing him, slapping him, etc. i can see how a jury could find that he didn't reasonably fear for his life. and he almost certainly could have retreated, which is an element in minnesota. if he actually and reasonably feared he was going to get beaten by 5 kids and he couldn't retreat, defending himself with a pocket knife was certainly satisfy the proportionality requirement.
jury probably came to the right result here under the law. however, the law here is wrong, and he was ethically and morally right to stand his ground and defend himself.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574363) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 2:07 PM Author: Odious Telephone
I don’t think Stand Your Ground would apply here even if Minnesota had it since it generally doesn’t apply to instigators (for example, Michael Drejka). The video opens with the kids floating down the river while the Romanian refugee bum-rushes into the middle of them and grabs two kids laying on inner tubes. Not exactly exculpatory for the defense.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574421)
|
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 2:45 PM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
i think you're getting mixed up here. reasonable fear and proportionality of response are separate elements. if his fear was reasonable then it is absolutely true his response was proportionate, because defending yourself with a knife is undoubtedly a proportionate response to getting beaten to death by 5 teens.
if woman is throwing dishes at her husband from across the room he could reasonably fear he could be severely injured or even die. but that doesn't mean he is entitled to pull out a revolver and shoot her when he could surely have rushed her and physically stopped her.
the degree of force you're allowed to defend yourself with doesn't slide based on how reasonable your fear is. it slides based on what is necessary to defend yourself and how serious your potential injury is.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574573) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 2:55 PM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
brother this isn't my opinion, this is black letter 1L crim law.
yes, reasonably fear of death justifies use of deadly force. hence, proportionality is not at issue here because if he thought he was going to be jumped and killed then deadly force was justified.
i think you're using proportionality in a general sense and may not be aware that proportionality is an separate element that must be established in a self defense claim. and that proportionality refers to the type of force used to defend yourself. i'm using proportionality as the legal term of art in a self defense claim
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574615) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 2:58 PM Author: Electric high-end market
My God, the disparate components of a self defense claim! *checks notes*
Wisconsin code 939.48(6) Self-defense and defense of others.
"A person may employ deadly force against another, if the person reasonably believes that force is necessary to protect a third-person or one's self from imminent death or great bodily harm, without incurring civil liability for injury to the other."
My God the unwritten but distinct and separate proportionality claim!
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574630) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 3:11 PM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
that's not the statute, that's case law interpreting the statute. the statute reads:
"A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person. ***The actor may intentionally use only such force or threat thereof as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference.*** The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself."
note my highlighted parts. that is the proportionality element. the section regarding deadly force, and the case you cited applying it, just says that deadly force can only be considered proportionate in those circumstances. thus, whether his response was proportionate is not at issue here, only whether his fear of grievous injury/death was reasonable and necessary.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574703) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 3:37 PM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
"The only element at play is reasonable belief. If the belief is reasonable, the response is justified, period"
correct, which is what i've been saying the entire time
http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&mc=158&forum_id=2#47574452
the rest of what you said is incorrect. the clause establishes that it is not proportional to use deadly force except in those limited situations. other states don't have that clause, and juries have found that deadly force was proportionate in situations that wouldn't fly under a statute like this.
it has nothing to do with continuing to use deadly force to defend yourself after the threat has been neutralized.
i don't see how that texas case is relevant at all. self defense is an affirmative defense to homicide. it has nothing to do with the degree of the homicide. if self defense was established in your example, that person could not be convicted of anything. and clearly it wasn't even from the facts you lay out because an *imminent* threat is also an element.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574814) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 3:45 PM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
brother you just cited me a case thinking it was a statute and mocked me for believing an "unwritten element", clearly not having read the statute where the proportionality element is plain to see.
you don't seem to understand the difference between an affirmative defense to a crime and a crime. self defense is an affirmative defense to a crime. if it is established, there is no crime. you don't convicted of a lesser crime once you've established an affirmative defense.
i can certainly find you hundreds of cases regarding proportionality easily because proportionality is a major element of self defense. do you want me to pull the 50 state survey on the proportionality element of self defense?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574843) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 5:22 PM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
no, it wouldn't, because that's what the imminent element is for.
"ou still don't have one example of reasonable belief in imminent danger but disproportionate use of force. I'll wait."
again, it's a fundamental element of criminal law. i'll pull the wisconsin annotated code or just search that clause in westlaw later, it will be trivial to cite endless examples on this. proportionality is a fundamental element of self-defense. it's something on every criminal law exam and the bar exam.
you just cited a federal case regarding 3rd party defense thinking it was the wisconsin self defense statute. considering you had not even read the statute, don't you think there is *some* possibility you might be wrong on what the purpose of that clause is and how it's interpreted? considering you've read it for the first time in the middle of this conversation and were incorrect about proportionality being in the statute at all?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47575178) |
|
Date: April 12th, 2024 6:39 AM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
State v. Bell, No. 2021AP2228-CR (Wis. Ct. App. Jul. 11, 2023)
"The settled law of self-defense incorporates a fundamental principle of proportionality-that is, limiting the amount of force that a defendant can use or threaten to use only to that "necessary to prevent or terminate the interference."
State v. Loggins, 918 N.W.2d 644, 383 Wis. 2d 786, 2018 WI App. 54 (Wis. Ct. App. 2018)
"Self-defense is an issue in this case. The law of self-defense allows the defendant to threaten or intentionally use force against another only if:
• the defendant believed that there was an actual or imminent unlawful interference with the defendant's person; and,
• the defendant believed that the amount of force the defendant used or threatened to use was necessary to prevent or terminate the interference; and
• the defendant's beliefs were reasonable.
Determining Whether Beliefs Were Reasonable
A belief may be reasonable even though mistaken. In determining whether the defendant's beliefs were reasonable, the standard is what a person of ordinary intelligence and prudence would have believed in the defendant's position under the circumstances that existed at the time of the alleged offense. The reasonableness of the defendant's beliefs must be determined from the standpoint of the defendant at the time of the defendant's acts and not from the viewpoint of the jury now."
"21 The problem with Loggins' argument is that it fails entirely to address the requirement that the force used be "only such force ... as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference." See WIS. STAT . § 939.48(1) (emphasis added). As to the deadly force Loggins used, the statute prohibits self-defense by "force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself." See id. (emphasis added)."
***
i recommend reading State v. Loggins as it goes over the statute pretty autistically. most cases just simply cite the statute since the words on the page are so plain. there is no alternate reading other than what i've said. this is established, fundemental, black letter self-defense.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47576486) |
|
Date: April 12th, 2024 10:57 AM Author: Electric high-end market
So a fistfight broke out, the defendant was punched and kicked, a gun fell out of some dindus hoodie and the defendant picked it up and shot a bunch of people, killing two and wounding a third?
OK, so how does this support the proportionality argument? It appears that neither the jury nor the court of appeals believed that he had reasonable fear of imminent danger.
This is the relevant part of what you quoted: the requirement that the force used be "only such force ... as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference."
As to the deadly force Loggins used, the statute prohibits self-defense by "force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself."
The limiting factor here is not the proportionality of the deadly force used but rather the reasonable belief that one's life is at risk, and a response that can only be used to terminate that direct threat. Here, firing into a group does not meet the standard, unless everyone in that group was a direct and eminent threat. If one guy was coming at him with deadly force it would be justified if he shot that specific person. There's no proportionality argument needed in this case and there's nothing you cited that even addresses proportionality. Simply put, he did not have reasonable belief, and he did not select a specific target that he could then say this person was causing me risk of life and limb.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47577039) |
|
Date: April 12th, 2024 11:08 AM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
i'm not arguing about the facts of either case (loggins seems wrongly decided imo). i'm addressing your contention that the clause doesn't mean what i said it means. the case clearly says it does:
"21 The problem with Loggins' argument is that it fails entirely to address the requirement that the force used be "only such force ... as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference." See WIS. STAT . § 939.48(1) (emphasis added). As to the deadly force Loggins used, the statute prohibits self-defense by "force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself." See id. (emphasis added)."
***
the facts of either case are irrelevant. i'm just saying what the statute says and what the words mean.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47577064) |
|
Date: April 12th, 2024 11:41 AM Author: vigorous roast beef forum
http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&mc=180&forum_id=2#47575125
"You still don't have one example of reasonable belief in imminent danger but disproportionate use of force. I'll wait."
this is literally what happened in loggins. loggins shot at a group of people who were attacking him, judge found it was reasonable to fear and self-defense was appropriate but not lethal force.
you said that the law didn't include a proportionality element and that the final clause was unrelated to degree of force. it is. but that's fine, it seems we're in agreement now.
***
as far as why i think loggins was wrongly decided -- the issue in the case isn't *whether* it was disproportionate, but whether there is *some evidence* of it. the case was about not giving a jury self-defense instructions. i think being attacked by a group of people should satisify the "some evidence" standard and the issue should go to a jury. the judge did not allow a jury to consider self-defense at all.
that being said, the facts are presented in the light most favorable to the defendant here. reading between the lines i think this guy was brawling in some gangland bullshit, the tables got turned, and he shot up the fools. which probably influenced the judge's decision. nevertheless, as presented in the opinion, i think loggins should have prevailed.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47577167) |
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 2:21 PM Author: Stirring space
I would disagree on the aggressor part. He was calm and just standing there at the time he was assaulted. Regardless of what had happened prior to the start of the recording enough time had elapsed that it's entirely irrelevant IMO.
They had already jumped him. No need to speculate as to the reasonability of his belief that this would happen. He'd been thrown to the grown multiple times, in a river, and struck in the face while surrounded by a group and screaming drunk people. If they were black, i don't think anyone would question the reasonability of his fear of great bodily harm.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574483)
|
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 2:04 PM Author: Stirring space
Is that orange swimsuit guy stabbed in the gut and on his back in the water at 2:07?
He attacked the guy from the back when he was already down then shoved him down again.
I'd have a hard time convicting this guy of anything. Surrounded by drunk people shouting at him and attacking him.
Wisconsin code 939.48(6) Self-defense and defense of others.
"A person may employ deadly force against another, if the person reasonably believes that force is necessary to protect a third-person or one's self from imminent death or great bodily harm, without incurring civil liability for injury to the other."
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574412)
|
Date: April 11th, 2024 2:32 PM Author: marvelous immigrant state
The jury convicted on the charge of battery against Madison, meaning the jury believed the evidence that Miu struck her. That happened before any of the dudes touched him. Once you have that fact, the other convictions make sense. Utter disregard for life is based on totality of circumstances. Miu pulled a knife on two women and punched one of them before he was ever struck and before any male even touched him (the women touched him before, but only grabbing his arm and pushing his shoulder). He got punched once in response to him punching Madison and fell in the water. The punch that knocked him down came from a 20 something male who wasnt part of the group of teens taunting him. He gets pushed and slapped while down, which is the most danger he was ever in, but that's not when he started stabbing. Its not until he recovers to his feet that he starts stabbing everyone around him, including a woman, none of whom struck him. In fact, he never gets struck again after getting up, but that's when all 5 were stabbed. He had no apparent injuries. He walked away calmly, disposed of the weapon, lied to his friends and police about what happened and only admitted lying when contradicted by video evidence.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47574523) |
|
Date: April 12th, 2024 8:25 PM Author: frozen really tough guy idiot
I think its more as to whether or not you're a weak man who fantasizes about killing others "in self defense."
If you're an alpha male who gets in fights like this all the time, you think the guy was insane.
If you'e like a lot of xoxo posters who insist on "carrying a knife for protection!" and have their concealed carry, etc, then you think its totally justified.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5515429&forum_id=2#47578548) |
|
|