re: Gasser didn't testify in McKnight case; Guilty of manslaughter

Louisiana Criminal Jury Instructions (2017)
§ 6:23 Aggressor doctrine

A person who is the aggressor or who brings on a difficulty cannot claim the right of self-defense unless he withdraws from the conflict in good faith and in such a manner that his adversary knows or should know that he desires to withdraw and discontinue the conflict.

[In determining whether the defendant was the aggressor, you must consider the nature of the confrontation and whether the victim’s actions were a reasonable response.]

Thus, if you find that the defendant was the aggressor or that he brought on the difficulty, you must reject his claim of self-defense unless you find:

(1) that he withdrew from the conflict; and

(2) that his withdrawal was in good faith; and

(3) that he withdrew in a manner that put his adversary on notice that he wished to withdraw and discontinue the conflict.

I. If you find that

(1) the defendant was lawfully inside a [dwelling][place of business][motor vehicle] and

(2) the person against whom the force or violence was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the [dwelling][place of business][motor vehicle] and

(3) the defendant knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred,

you should [must] presume that the defendant held a reasonable belief that the use of force or violence was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto [or compel the intruder to leave the [premises]][motor vehicle].]

II. If you find that the defendant was not engaged in unlawful activity and was in a place where he [she] had a right to be, the defendant had not duty to retreat before using force or violence and had the right to stand his [her] ground and meet force with force.

III. If you find that the defendant used force or violence in defense of his [her] person or property, you shall not consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the defendant had a reasonable belief that such force or violence was reasonably and apparently necessary to prevent the forcible offense or prevent the unlawful entry.

The problem with that defense angle is that the forensics don't line up with it. The coroner stated that there wasn't gunshot residue found on McKnight's body, which would indicated that McKnight wasn't shot at as close of range as Gasser claimed. So Gasser had gotten his gun out his gym bag 2 miles prior, had his window rolled down, and McKnight was far enough away when he got shot for no gunshot residue to be found on his clothes or body.

quote:

---

Even if Gasser was the aggressor, the fact that he didn’t get out of his car could suggest that he withdrew from the conflict.

---

Uhhh, no. His window would've been up and he would've just drove off if he wanted to withdraw from the conflict. Dude pulled his gun a mile before the shooting. He wasn't withdrawing from shite.

quote:

---

Even if Gasser was the aggressor, the fact that he didn’t get out of his car could suggest that he withdrew from the conflict.

---

It could

The fact he pulled out his gun, and then chased after JM further, tells me he was ready to kill him

He couldn’t drive off. He was boxed in

And having his window down doesn’t mean anything to me.

So what if he pulled his gun? I drive with my gun on my lap sometimes. Doesn’t mean I’m looking to shoot someone.

quote:

---

attempting to drive off

---

He doesn't have to and failing to do so cannot be held against him.

Even still, it wasn't possible to drive off.

quote:

---

I drive with my gun on my lap sometimes.

---

Uh why?

quote:

---

Uh why?

---

I love my gun.

Who are the def lawyers?