(08-31-2020, 03:26 PM)jagibelieve Wrote:

(08-31-2020, 02:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: 939.48 Self-defense and defense of others.
[font=Times,][font=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif](2)Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:[/font]
(a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.[/font]

If you are going to play lawyer and read statutes and use them for your argument, you need to read the whole statute and not cherry pick a few phrases.

1.  The unlawful conduct that he might have been engaging in was possession of the firearm.  That wasn't  "the type likely to provoke others to attack him" and not the reason why he was attacked.  Read the rest of the first sentence of the statute.  "except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm".  He was attacked initially for putting a dumpster fire out intended for more unlawful destruction by the assailant.  He was not attacked for possessing the firearm.  From the video evidence and testimony that I've seen I'm pretty sure that he had every reason to believe that he was in danger of death or great bodily harm.

2.  Read the second sentence fully, especially the part that says "the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense" and the part that says "unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant".  From the video evidence that I have seen as well as the testimony that I have read, it looks like he made every reasonable means to escape.

The fact of the matter is that the young man appeared to be very controlled and disciplined in his use of his firearm, especially in a fast high-stress environment.  I haven't seen where he ever fired randomly or at anyone not attacking him.

So again, you are wrong.

That kid is 1,000,000 times the man that Mikesez could dream of being.

The fact that he didn't fire on the one guy when he froze after being on the ground until he began moving towards him again showed incredible restraint. Then he got up and slowly began walking backwards to the cops keeping his enemies in front of him. Amazing kid.

---

(08-31-2020, 02:53 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(08-31-2020, 02:42 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: Which he did...

He was backed into a corner and was being harassed by a Child Molester (convicted in Arizona - love the irony in a minor killing a pedophile).. only until he was backed into a corner did he fire. Then he attempted to render aid and call 911 before being chased by the others he eventually shot after once again trying to escape. The proof he thought his life was in danger? All the many, many videos of people getting kicked in the head repeatedly while down.

He's going to get off and the only reason the prosecutor is even attempting this miscarriage of justice is for BLM and Antifa brownie points. It's going to backfire.

The first man had already thrown something at him and missed when he got shot in the head.  The first man didn't even touch him.  You think the shooter had exhausted every reasonable means to escape from the first kill? Help me understand that.  The man threw something at him, has nothing else to throw, and is closing in with just the shirt on his back.  How is that man causing imminent danger of death or great bodily harm?

The bullet grazed his forehead... it was the four other shots that actually killed him.

---