justifiable homicide???
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: justifiable homicide???

  1. #1

    justifiable homicide???

    In the state of Washington, when a intruder is in your residence and has just spotted you and you have just spotted him. What is the legal action besides calling 911? Am I justified in engaging or no? Having this conversation with some LEO friends and I'm curious to this answer.

  2.   
  3. #2
    Detroit 45 acp Guest
    You need new LEO friends LMAO!!!!!!!!!

  4. #3
    Your question is too vague...and, the answer is based on a number of circumstances.

    If he has a gun and is pointing it at you, it is reasonable to believe you are in immediate fear of serious bodily harm or death. In most states, that is reason enough to use deadly force.

    If he is just standing there, with the gun at his side, not saying anything...you might not be justified (in your state) in using deadly force. On the other hand, some states have passed laws that basically say if someone is in your home - even unarmed - and not an overt threat, it is reasonable to believe that they are there to do harm and you may be justified in use of deadly force.

    If he has a knife/baseball bat/tire iron, is he holding it in a threatening manner? Is he making a move towards you? Even if he is not moving towards you, is he saying anything that indicates you should be in immediate fear of serious bodily harm or death? If so, in most jurisdictions it is reasonable to use deadly force to stop his actions.

    I could go on and on...but, as you can see, there is no simple, direct answer.

    Bottom line...if you can articulate in front of a jury that based on the moment you chose to shoot someone, was he doing/saying something that you believed put you in immediate threat of serious bodily harm or death, you will probably be OK.

    No matter what, you need to ensure that your actions were in line with your state's "justifiable homicide" statute.
    H&K-Certified MP5 Operator and Instructor
    FBI-Certified Police Pistol and Shotgun Instructor
    State of New Mexico-Certified Concealed Carry Instructor

  5. #4
    All that is required is a reasonable belief that a felony is intended to be committed:

    RCW 9A.16.050
    Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.



    *** CHANGE IN 2011 *** (SEE 5045.SL) ***

    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

    (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.
    Residential burglary is a felony:

    RCW 9A.52.025
    Residential burglary.



    *** CHANGE IN 2011 *** (SEE 5891-S.SL) ***

    (1) A person is guilty of residential burglary if, with intent to commit a crime against a person or property therein, the person enters or remains unlawfully in a dwelling other than a vehicle.

    (2) Residential burglary is a class B felony. In establishing sentencing guidelines and disposition standards, the sentencing guidelines commission and the juvenile disposition standards commission shall consider residential burglary as a more serious offense than second degree burglary.
    and

    RCW 9A.52.040
    Inference of intent.


    In any prosecution for burglary, any person who enters or remains unlawfully in a building may be inferred to have acted with intent to commit a crime against a person or property therein, unless such entering or remaining shall be explained by evidence satisfactory to the trier of fact to have been made without such criminal intent.
    Any other questions?

    Quote Originally Posted by shooter View Post
    Your question is too vague...and, the answer is based on a number of circumstances.
    The Revised Code of Washington says differently.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  6. #5
    So if the intruder is in the home and at the time notices the home owner and at that time turns and heads out of the bedroom and down the hall towards a child's room but also towards an exit. Isn't against the law to shoot the intruder in the back. I mean, in this situation I would shoot to stop the advancement towards my kids room. Am I wrong on this thinking?

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by ASC1WBullock View Post
    So if the intruder is in the home and at the time notices the home owner and at that time turns and heads out of the bedroom and down the hall towards a child's room but also towards an exit. Isn't against the law to shoot the intruder in the back. I mean, in this situation I would shoot to stop the advancement towards my kids room. Am I wrong on this thinking?
    In my opinion, and I am not a lawyer, the prosecution would have to prove that any reasonable person would know the subject was fleeing and intended to exit, without committing a felony in the process, when the subject was shot - such as if the person was two steps from the front door, empty handed, moving towards the door when shot.

    In your case where the subject is deep inside the house and there are other occupants between the subject and the exit - I think you would be justified - no reasonable person could presume to know what the intentions of the subject were, they may be heading to the kitchen to obtain a knife, they may be retreating to a location in the house where they know their partner is.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Houston Metro Area, Texas
    Posts
    3,004
    In my house the answer would be allow one or both of the dogs to continue the attack approach carefully with weapon in hand shotgun or pistol while verifing BG had no weapon, call 911 and tell them come quick bring ambulance as two 90 pound dogs are busy, issue stop command to dogs after contact with LEO and cover BG till police arrive, any additional violent or agressive act by BG, release dogs seek cover and cover BG with weapon until police arrive (this for folks who believe police can protect you) with average response time of 17-20 minutes divided by two large dogs that gives the BG a chance to make peace with the Lord.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    7,733
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    All that is required is a reasonable belief that a felony is intended to be committed:
    Yes. Pretty cut and dry. Same in NY.
    GOD, GUNS and GUITARS

  10. #9
    It seems like there are so many loop holes in the RCW on this subject. Don't know if protecting our family is a concern of the courts as much as placing someone in prison. Seems like laws are protecting criminals more the good citizens.

  11. #10
    Nightmare45, I agree with you if I had two dogs but then you have these fools who would try to sue you for having your dogs attacking. I mean I have seen some stupid cases of victims being sued by criminals families who have been shot or hurt while they were committing a crime.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast