re: Left-Wing News Hired Hitman Charged W/ 2nd Degree Murder Of Patriot

Only if it was planned. And that means a conspiracy.

quote:

---

The moment Dolloff reached for his pistol he had made the decision to transition to deadly force.

---

We both know that this is likely the case.

I don't know that the prosecution will be able to prove that to a bunch of hippies in Colorado.

quote:

---

Keltner, who had his hands at his side, was racing to catch up with non-lethal force at that point.

---

Dolloff's perception is important.

Hank is correct about that. If he didn't acknowledge knowing what Keltner had in his hand, it could certainly be as simple as saying he knew he was armed and thought it was a firearm.

It's shaky, but jurors have been persuaded by less.

I have trouble attempting to call Keltner the aggressor. Yes, he's walking around with a can of pepper spray in his hand... he'd been doing that for several minutes. He had not sprayed anyone yet. We don't know if the can even works at this point, or it's just a prop.
He doesn't spray the guy who gets up in his face and starts screaming "spray me n****". That guy also yells "frick around and find out", which I DO take as a threat.

And again understand, this wasn't supposed to be a confrontation event in the first point, this was a rally for the side Keltner was supporting. They weren't out there intending to interfere or interact with a BLM/Antifa rally scheduled at the same time. THAT is why there's only the one guy, he's up there trying to start shite.

So to summarize up to this point: this was an event supposedly friendly to Keltner and his group. They were there to voice support, not engage in a confrontation with BLM people at the moment. They're just engaging in a lawful assembly, voicing their 1st Amendment rights.

The BLM guy comes and "ambushes" them on the way out, afterwards.
Dolloff then engages, as Keltner comes over to someone (Newman, I guess). Keltner is still holding the unused can, but has never sprayed anyone.
Dolloff reaches and makes contact, a physical reaction to Keltner's verbal statements. Keltner responds by slapping Dolloff, which is an understandable reaction to someone coming and grabbing at you... and he backs away.

Dolloff then responds by pulling a gun on the retreating Keltner. Keltner raises his can, because it's the only thing he has in his hand.
Dolloff then shoots him in the face.

Dolloff escalated the incident from verbal to physical, and then shot a retreating individual who was, 2 minutes before, walking back to his car with friends and family.

Keltner attended a "friendly" event, he didn't go to a hostile one to disrupt or fight.
He did not initiate the verbal confrontation, the BGM guy did.
He did not initiate the physical confrontation, Dolloff did.
He did not attack, he backed away with his hands visible.

He was carrying pepper spray can... so what. We have marches with guys carrying firearms, they're not getting arrested (unless they discharge one and shoot somebody). The legal purpose of said spray is a non-lethal deterrent to attack; a stranger (Dolloff) made intentional physical contact with him. Sounds like exactly the purpose that spray is sold.

Also Dolloffs perception is important but it also has to be reasonable. Dolloffs perception is one component of a two part assessment of the appropriateness of deadly force.

Dolloffs “perception” at this point is going to be whatever has the best chance of getting him off and isn’t really worth discussing in a factual sense.

The best argument against him thinking the mace is a gun is when did he ascertain it “might be a gun”?

If he saw the device in Keltners hand prior to being struck, why did he physically intervene prior to drawing his weapon? Why not draw your weapon first to gain initiative on the threat? Why would the act of him slapping you and backing up change anything? Wouldn’t you expect Keltner to just shoot you if he had a gun in his hand?

If Dolloff claims he saw it after the strike, then when, exactly, did you see it? If you didn’t see it before the strike, how did you manage to see it after with your glasses off and disoriented? You immediately went to draw after the slap; you mean to tell me you didn’t see anything in his hand before you were slapped, but then noticed it in the 0.25 seconds between you regaining focus and drawing your weapon?

If you noticed the device after you began to draw and aim, you realize you inappropriately escalated force in response to being struck once in the head and then put yourself in a position you have to shoot?

If there weren’t as much video evidence, an attorney might make it reasonable, yes. The entirety of the interaction being on video makes it hard to stitch together something that “sounds” reasonable because it may not “look” reasonable.

quote:

---

Of course it is.

---

Not really- not the way we are currently discussing it anyway. It would be better to do it in reverse: instead of saying what his perception may have been and assessing the video, we should be assessing the video and trying to see what looks like a reasonable stance.

That is what the defense is going to be doing because we all know that was a murder and Dolloff did not infact fear for his life. They’re going to watch the video and try to piece together an argument that’s not in direct contradiction with reality.

All good points T.

There are going to be up to twenty or more witnesses in that courtroom that all saw Keltner draw out the mace during the confrontation with Elliot. And the best outcome for Dolloff is that he does not even testify. Thinking he can have his lawyer present an argument that his client thought that Keltner had a gun is prima facie ridiculous. The full weight of the witnesses and electronic evidence is going to be it was clear he had mace.

I am going with DB. Better hope they have a whole lot of hippies on that jury.

I’m also curious if there’s ever been a successful self-defense assertion wherein the defendant did not testify on their own behalf. I just don’t know.

The video adds context and timing. It wouldn’t just be the attorney saying Dolloff was struck in the head and Keltner engaged the mace: you’d have a bunch of conflicting witnesses saying who did what and when. Plenty of room to inject doubt and confuse memory.

Fortunately for us, we have the entire story.

The video also makes Keltners intent to disengage very apparent. The headshot and backwards steps by Keltner are the keys to this case.