re: Defense Lawyers point of view for using your concealed firearm

quote:

---

So, the reality is that if I shoot someone in self defense, and I invoke my right to remain silent until I speak with an attorney, you will arrest me?

---

If there is no other witnesses and not enough evidence to show that it was clearly self defense.....yes.

If I'm stuck with one dead body and one shooter in the street with no witnesses and you are refusing to talk....you have painted me into a corner.

The only facts I have at that point is that you shot someone.

Some jurisdictions are gonna arrest you, no matter what.

That's a fact.

quote:

---

If I'm stuck with one dead body and one shooter in the street with no witnesses and you are refusing to talk....you have painted me into a corner.

---

Not trying to be a smart aleck, but, quite honestly, I really believe I would rather paint you in a corner temporarily than paint myself in a corner permanently by saying something that could/would be twisted out of context by some prosecutor. Their sole job is to put folks in jail, not keep them out of jail. More prosecutions and convictions help them get re-elected. And even if you choose to NOT arrest, my understanding is that a grand jury will still meet and possibly indict me or not indict me, whether you arrest me on the spot or not? And possibly, how well I know the investigating officer and commonwealth attorney here in Virginia would have a bearing on whether I gave an immediate statement or not. I know the sheriff and some of the deputies, commonwealth attorney, and some of the state troopers here and I have credibility with all of them. That would not be the case outside of my home area. I've only had to hold a handgun on someone just once in my life and the perpetrator didn't even know it. Had he reached into my vehicle and tried to harm me or my 5 year old grandson, I would have pulled the trigger. I told this to the sheriff, state troopers, and the commonwealth attorney. The perp got 4 years for what he did. But to make a long story short, the sheriff, state troopers, and the commonwealth attorney all told me what I already knew: that I have a right to protect myself.

quote:

---

you can terminate the interview whenever you feel uncomfortable about the line of questioning.

---

That's precisely the point that a lot of us have mentioned here. Any interview or questioning by the police over anything, from a traffic violation, tail light burned out, or shooting someone in self defense is uncomfortable.

quote:

---

When the interview becomes accusatory...that is when you should consider an attorney.

---

To me, the whole interview would be accusatory. Why else have the interview? And realistically, not being a lawyer or LEO, and being in a very stressful situation, I may not be able to sufficiently determine if the interview has become accusatory. Not sure what that means even now when I'm not stressed out and haven't shot someone in self defense...

lol.

You will know when it becomes accusatory. Basically the investigators will start claiming inconsistencies in your story and/or claim that you are not being honest.

quote:

---

Because I am confident in my ability to make the choice to use lethal force.

---

As am I. I'm not confident in an overzealous, or dishonest prosecutor trying to hang my scalp on his belt for the sake of getting votes, though. And I'm not confident, either, in all LEO's committment to protect and serve. Just like with any profession, there are good ones and there are bad ones. You certainly sound like one of the good guys. Nevertheless, you have a job to do. We understand that. And just as the commonwealth attorney told me: "You have a right to protect yourself.", I interpret that to mean that I have a right to protect myself both at the time of the incident and afterwards, during the legal battle. I am just so thankful the perp had the good sense to back away and not force me to shoot. I felt then, and I feel now, that The Good Lord had a hand in that.

quote:

---

again my opinion is let me get my statement documented from the beginning and it not change to lend me credibility. Good idea to ask that it be recorded or better yet give a written statement. That way it is my statements shaping the story instead of the shitty officer's.

If you remain silent, it makes it easier for him/her to shape the story the way he wants to portray it in the beginning. You basically are giving him/her a head start.

I would rather it be....here is my statement and it isn't changing. Documented from the get go.

---

Good points. Thanks!

quote:

---

Typically within 20-40 minutes any hysteria if any has passed

---

This is precisely what I'm saying. I don't mean you won't be able to even function remotely for hours on end. I'm saying it will likely be overwhelming immediately after and that little window is not a good time to give a detailed statement.

Not speaking is literally the only advantage you have in that room with the policeman during an interview. Why would I piss that away to someone that is legally able to lie to me, just to give a statement that can be used against me in the court of law?

quote:

---

As an investigator, someone who refuses to give any statement or answer questions is gonna instantly lose credibility with me. Again, why do you need an attorney to tell you to tell the truth?

---

Wait, so you're telling me that if someone freely gives you a statement, everything is ok, but if they immediately lawyer up and plead the 5th you automatically think they're guilty of something nefarious? That's kinda scary that you're ignoring these people's Constitutional rights.