Is it wise to "Clam up" after being involved in a shooting?

Trailboss · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2008, 21:38 **Posts:** 3475

Most of us have seen the videos of the professor and detective that tell us of the danger of talking to the police, part I can be found here;

After several years of conducting post shoots Massad Ayoob agrees that your own mouth can be your own enemy, at the same time refusing to say anything could cause you to quickly become the prime suspect and make things much more expensive, monetarily, and incarcerationally (new word [smilie=icon_mrgreen.gif]

).
After reading numerous accounts of the San Tan shooting I got the impression that the victim's attitude toward the cops played a big role on why he was able to have dinner with his family later that day and was quickly viewed as an innocent person.

From the gun owner defense network headed up by Marty Hayes an Ayoob on the board of directors;
http://armedcitizensnetwork.org/you-hav ... ain-silent

Quote:

whenever one person shoots another (like you shooting an attacker), they have fulfilled the criminal elements of either murder or assault, whether the person lives or dies. When the police show up, they have “Criminal Law 101” which they learned in the police academy running through their heads. They look at the dead body with holes in it, they look at you holding a gun. They add up these factors and “murder” flashes up on the screen.

At this time, there is only one way for you to avoid going to jail. That way is to convince the police that there are extenuating circumstances that negate the crime of murder. But if they don’t know about those extenuating circumstances, you will be arrested. And once arrested, you will remain in jail until you can make bail, or a kind and friendly judge decides to release you. In many jurisdictions, you will be arrested anyway because you fulfilled the legal elements of the crime, regardless of any mitigating circumstances. You need to find out what the protocol is when police encounter a self-defense shooting in your jurisdiction.

The crime of murder encompasses the intentional killing of another human being. Only a defense to that crime, will allow the shooter to walk free. If the cops have no information that you acted in legitimate self defense, you are sure to be arrested. I just asked a police academy instructor what they are teaching recruits about the armed citizen and self-defense law, and he said, “Nothing!”

And, if that isn’t bad enough, in court, when you are on trial for murder and your defense is self defense, you have to admit to the elements of the crime in order to invoke self defense. In opening argument, your attorney will tell the jury that you killed that man. All the prosecution has to prove is that you did not kill him in self defense. If you don’t put on a legitimate case, the jury doesn’t have any choice but to convict you of murder. The burden has shifted to you to prove your act was a legitimate case of self defense.

How do you do this?

Actions of an Innocent Person

First, don’t act like a guilty man or woman. When the first words out of your mouth are, “I want my lawyer,” you have done a surprisingly good imitation of a street-wise criminal. What is any self-respecting cop supposed to think? Dead body + gun + “I want my lawyer” = jail.

If, on the other hand, the officer hears, “My life was threatened, I had to shoot,” he forms a slightly different picture. In addition, if he first learned of the incident by a call from you to 9-1-1, and at that time you indicated that you were the victim of a robbery (or whatever crime caused you to believe your life was in danger) then he forms a different picture of the call before he even gets there.

If all he hears is: “Shooting occurred, suspect is still on the scene and armed,” called in by a witness, then you will be perceived immediately as a nasty character who needs to be dealt with aggressively.

You need to be the reporting party, if it is possible for you to do that. Win the race to the phone. Most criminal prosecutions start out with a 9-1-1 dispatch tape, to set the mood for the jury. In your case, if you report the crime first, the jury gets to hear you telling dispatch in your own words, that you were just attacked and had to defend yourself. Then, the police testify about what you said to them, and they report, in the “excited utterance” exception to the hearsay rule, that you told them you were attacked and had to defend yourself. See where this is going?

In addition to telling the police that you were attacked, point out any witnesses that saw the incident, or know of any evidence that is likely to be missed by the officers during their investigation. Guilty people don’t help the cops. Innocent people do.

Were you injured during the assault against you? If it was a physical altercation, as are most disparity of force situations, there will likely be evidence of that attack on your body. If you are aware of any pain as a result of the attack, ask for medical aid. It is likely that when attacked, you experienced an adrenalin dump. One of the effects of adrenalin is that it masks pain. You may have been injured, but don’t really feel it. Those injuries, even if you don’t feel any pain, are evidence of an attack. A bruise on the noggin may in fact be a concussion. You need to get checked out at the hospital.

It is pretty tough for a prosecutor bent on putting you in prison to cross examine medical records. You see, in the hierarchy of professionals, doctors trump lawyers, and so a doctor’s word is going to be believed before the rantings of a prosecutor. If you just tell the cops you want your lawyer, and don’t ask for medical aid, that evidence is lost. You may be a rough, tough guy, “awe shucks, it’s just a flesh wound,” and it very well may be, but it is also evidence of the attack. Are your clothes dirty, wet or muddy? It’s evidence that you were on the ground. Make sure the cops see, understand and document that fact. You see, no one knows what little piece of evidence will be the one that tips the scales of justice in your favor, so you cannot leave anything out.

Know When to Stop Talking

But you also need to know when to stop discussing the event with the cops, and you are at that point now. After establishing that YOU were the one attacked (and it might be a good idea to explain that you want the guy you shot prosecuted if he lives) then this is the time to request your attorney. Say something like this: “Officers, this is a real serious matter, and while I want to cooperate with you fully. I have been taught that it is a good idea to have an attorney present before I give any detailed statements. Can I call my attorney? I have his number in my wallet.” What is the cop going to say? No, you cannot call your attorney? Well, he might, and if he does, that’s okay, too, but you ARE going to get the chance to talk with your attorney before any more questioning. In the meantime, you should be viewed by the police as being cooperative.

The premise behind this educational essay is that you are innocent of any criminal activity in your legitimate act of self defense. If you go to court and testify, which you will likely have to do, you will be testifying to the truth. Finally, what you tell the cops at the scene is also the truth, so where is the downside? The truth never changes.

People who carry guns in our society do so with the understanding that they have voluntarily accepted a huge responsibility. They need to receive training in the legalities of use of deadly force, decision making, along with how to handle yourself if you have to use a gun for self defense, in addition to the physical skills of how to handle guns safely and competently.

dauph · **Joined:** 09 Oct 2010, 20:20 **Posts:** 2671

Jeopardy
Opportunity
Ability

Hansen · **Posted:** 15 Jun 2011, 08:53

I wouldn't say "clam up", but rather it is wise to get yourself together as much as possible and do what ever is needed for yourself so you don't do anything that could jeopdize you! With or without a lawyer..... The choice is yours.

Chance favors a prepared mind.

Jay21 · **Posted:** 15 Jun 2011, 09:15

The police have a basic duty to investigate a "possible" crime. That does not mean they are there to "help" you get out of there. Not a bash on cops, someone needs to investigate and if taken from a neutral line they should not care if you did or not and work on the evidence the gather. They are human, for better or worse, and will make judgements based on emotion also. If involved in a shooting, do not talk until you can calm down and gather you thoughts. Remember "everything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law." The video above has a bunch of great points. However no 2 instances are the same, what worked at the San Tan shooting may never work again, what "works" according to the guy in the video may not have worked well in the San Tan Shooting. Until you are calm and can think and speak clearly and calmly STFU. Plead nothing but you need to calm down before making any statements.

administrator · **Joined:** 19 Sep 2009, 15:40 **Posts:** 5365

Obviously it is possible to say the right things and make the cops think you are the "good guy" or "victim". The point about shutting up is that it is the best move with the most expected positive outcomes. Add in your likely mental state it makes it more important to not accidentally hang yourself. Shutting up is the conservative, safe play.

Hansen · **Posted:** 15 Jun 2011, 11:08

Jay21 wrote:

The police have a basic duty to investigate a "possible" crime. That does not mean they are there to "help" you get out of there.

You are absolutley correct. They (Police) are there to figure out A from B (meaning find out basically who is in the right and who was not). then they move on to another call, period. A good investigator will have plenty of empathy, not sympathy.

Most of the time the only one that gets you in trouble, is you. Think wisely for yourself.

As Jay21 stated, no two incidents are exactley the same. They all can have and will have different circumstances to some degree. When taking advise from who ever or where ever, use it wisely and make sure it fits your circumstances.

Trailboss · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2008, 21:38 **Posts:** 3475

Hansen wrote:

I wouldn't say "clam up", but rather it is wise to get yourself together as much as possible and do what ever is needed for yourself so you don't do anything that could jeopdize you! With or without a lawyer..... The choice is yours.

Chance favors a prepared mind.

Jeopdize? you been hangin in da hood Hansen? [smilie=icon_mrgreen.gif]

Good point, thinking them things through beforehand can save a heap o grief later...I was impressed with Marty's advice because he has been a cop, became a lawyer and a firearms trainer and ccw supporter..so much has been made about never saying anything but rank name and serial#, that I thought that this perspective deserved airing...it may not work for an emotionally stressed person, but for myself, I have been in numerous hairy situations over the years and dealt with them without panicking or freaking out.

I don't think I would have a problem saying, "Officer, this man attacked me, I would like to file a complaint. His gun is over there, casings over here, and the witnesses are him, him, and her. “Officers, this is a real serious matter, and while I want to cooperate with you fully. I have been taught that it is a good idea to have an attorney present before I give any detailed statements. Can I call my attorney? I have his number in my wallet.”

Hansen · **Posted:** 15 Jun 2011, 16:11

Trailboss wrote:

Hansen wrote:

I wouldn't say "clam up", but rather it is wise to get yourself together as much as possible and do what ever is needed for yourself so you don't do anything that could jeopdize you! With or without a lawyer..... The choice is yours.

Chance favors a prepared mind.

Jeopdize? you been hangin in da hood Hansen? [smilie=icon_mrgreen.gif]

Good point, thinking them things through beforehand can save a heap o grief later...I was impressed with Marty's advice because he has been a cop, became a lawyer and a firearms trainer and ccw supporter..so much has been made about never saying anything but rank name and serial#, that I thought that this perspective deserved airing...it may not work for an emotionally stressed person, but for myself, I have been in numerous hairy situations over the years and dealt with them without panicking or freaking out.

I don't think I would have a problem saying, "Officer, this man attacked me, I would like to file a complaint. His gun is over there, casings over here, and the witnesses are him, him, and her. “Officers, this is a real serious matter, and while I want to cooperate with you fully. I have been taught that it is a good idea to have an attorney present before I give any detailed statements. Can I call my attorney? I have his number in my wallet.”

My bad... Opps... [smilie=icon_redface.gif]

I didn't catch that word....

Trailboss, the following is NOT directed at you or anyone, just my .02 cents in general.

In my opinion, this topic on when to speak to police is usually over dramatized by far. I have no issue talking to them or even giving them what is asked for to a point. Most people have enough brian power to know when things are beyond a certian point and then take action.

Most police officers (99%) are people just like us (meaning common decent people). If the gun owner screwed (on purpose or accidental) up than they should be held accountable by all means. Over 7 years of classes I have had 7 people use thier gun, 4 people used no lawyer at all and none of them had a horror story about the "bad police officer", they were vice versa. The other 3 made mistakes and were held accountable and were treated like criminals (as they should have been).

When a victim(s) call in for emergency assistance, they are going to be dealt with in a serious matter (not hugged and cuddled). Specially with the use of force (deadly) things need to be air tight and done right or the lawyers and courts will eat you alive. If I am a victim I want the police to have an air tight case in my favor, if that means not being cuddled (not talking about abused), then so be it. Cuddling time will come in due time.

I never tell people NOT to talk to police, I tell them using a lawyer is a real good idea and they need to do what is best for themselves. If they want to talk to police then do so, if you don't I give them a brief example of how they may want to convey that message. I always tell them they have the right to remain silent... What happens next is up to them and no one else.

A serious/stern officer is NOT a "bad officer", he is a professional one. but enough of this.

When it comes to seeking or taking advice, I would do (and I do) look at where it comes from (person and/or place) like you did. Would I take advice from a person(s) that got it second or third hand, absolutely NOT (commonly refered to as "I heard" or "What I remember is"). I prefer advice where it can be and should be backed up by a law/statute. When a person states "I do this...." or even states "I would do...." I look at thier circumstances and do they fit me. Many times they don't. There is a lot of good advice out in the world, just a lot of times they end up not being misguided good advice. The advice out thier can save or ruin your life pretty damn quick, be a cautious as you need to be.

I never give advice at all, I give people options and let them make the choice that best fits them. In fact, when I am asked about something, I ask questions to so I can be sure of the options I give them. In the legal area, I give ARS codes to look at to so the can determine thier circumstances and see how it would fit them and thier situation. I AN NOT A LAWYER IN ANY WAY!

administrator · **Joined:** 19 Sep 2009, 15:40 **Posts:** 5365

Overblown? Sure, most cases do not turn on statements but on other evidence. Still, by talking you produce evidence that can be used to imprison you. By not talking you do not produce evidence that can be used to imprison you. The choice it pretty clear if your goal is to stay out of prison.

If your goal is to look like a good citizen or help the police, or some other altruistic goal at the expense of producing evidence that can be used to imprison you, then speak freely. Post-shooting statements are used in virtually every borderline self defense case where the shooter is prosecuted. Why aid that?

Police and prosecutor motivations really do not matter at all. They can be completely mistaken and be in 100% good faith. The good guys put away innocent and borderline cases all the time. How does one avoid being one of those borderline cases that end up convicted? Listen to the consensus of criminal law attorneys: shut your face.

Hansen · **Posted:** 15 Jun 2011, 16:32

administrator wrote:

Overblown? Sure, most cases do not turn on statements but on other evidence. Still, by talking you produce evidence that can be used to imprison you. By not talking you do not produce evidence that can be used to imprison you. The choice it pretty clear if your goal is to stay out of prison.

If your goal is to look like a good citizen or help the police, or some other altruistic goal at the expense of producing evidence that can be used to imprison you, then speak freely. Post-shooting statements are used in virtually every borderline self defense case where the shooter is prosecuted. Why aid that?

Police and prosecutor motivations really do not matter at all. They can be completely mistaken and be in 100% good faith. The good guys put away innocent and borderline cases all the time. How does one avoid being one of those borderline cases that end up convicted? Listen to the consensus of criminal law attorneys: shut your face.

I agree with you for the most part, I just do not shove it down thier thoats as the word of christ. I give them options and they are adults and can make thier own decisions on what is best for them. Speaking to police will NOT mean you are going to be convicted on anything, just as not speaking to them will NOT mean you are going to come out alright.

Quote:

How does one avoid being one of those borderline cases that end up convicted? Listen to the consensus of criminal law attorneys: shut your face.

This is not an absolute 100% guarntee at all (maybe 98% at best). Anything can happen. Anyone that thinks this quote is fool proof is a fool themselves.

Quote:

How does one have a chance in avoiding being one of those borderline cases that end up convicted? Listen to the consensus of criminal law attorneys: shut your face.

administrator · **Joined:** 19 Sep 2009, 15:40 **Posts:** 5365

Hansen wrote:

administrator wrote:

Overblown? Sure, most cases do not turn on statements but on other evidence. Still, by talking you produce evidence that can be used to imprison you. By not talking you do not produce evidence that can be used to imprison you. The choice it pretty clear if your goal is to stay out of prison.

If your goal is to look like a good citizen or help the police, or some other altruistic goal at the expense of producing evidence that can be used to imprison you, then speak freely. Post-shooting statements are used in virtually every borderline self defense case where the shooter is prosecuted. Why aid that?

Police and prosecutor motivations really do not matter at all. They can be completely mistaken and be in 100% good faith. The good guys put away innocent and borderline cases all the time. How does one avoid being one of those borderline cases that end up convicted? Listen to the consensus of criminal law attorneys: shut your face.

I agree with you for the most part, I just do not shove it down thier thoats as the word of christ. I give them options and they are adults and can make thier own decisions on what is best for them. Speaking to police will NOT mean you are going to be convicted on anything, just as not speaking to them will NOT mean you are going to come out alright.

Quote:

How does one avoid being one of those borderline cases that end up convicted? Listen to the consensus of criminal law attorneys: shut your face.

This is not an absolute 100% guarntee at all (maybe 98% at best). Anything can happen.

What are you saying isn't guaranteed? That it keeps you from being convicted? Of course not. It is simply the best choice as a uniform rule. If the choice was between always blabbing or always shutting up... shutting up is clearly a better rule. Since nobody understands which is actually better at any given time (the possibilities are too complex in the early stages)- shutting up is the option with the best expected outcomes.

Talking and producing evidence against yourself only helps by influencing the investigating officer's complex bad guy/ good guy assessments. Even the most basic "I was in fear of my life" statements can get you hung on manslaughter.

Very few people end up regretting shutting up. Many people regret talking.

Hansen · **Posted:** 15 Jun 2011, 16:46

Hoild on Brad....

I read your statement for how it was written (I didn't read into it).

Quote:

How does one avoid being one of those borderline cases that end up convicted? Listen to the consensus of criminal law attorneys: shut your face.

This does not say "possibly avoid", it says "How does one avoid". I understand where you are going with it now, it is NOT written that way. This is where poeple read things and get wrong imppessions.

buffalo · **Posted:** 15 Jun 2011, 17:27

Several of my relatives are/were lawyers and judges and they have all told me that if i was ever in a situation where i had to shoot someone that when the cops get there tell them that you shot because you feared for your life and then shut up until you see your lawyer. This has also been told to me by numerous active and retired cops.

Hansen · **Posted:** 15 Jun 2011, 18:40

Nobody is saying it is a bad idea. It is an option, the best option to boot, but it is not a fail safe answer. I believe it is a damn good option for protecting yourself.

administrator · **Joined:** 19 Sep 2009, 15:40 **Posts:** 5365

Hansen wrote:

Hoild on Brad....

I read your statement for how it was written (I didn't read into it).

Quote:

How does one avoid being one of those borderline cases that end up convicted? Listen to the consensus of criminal law attorneys: shut your face.

This does not say "possibly avoid", it says "How does one avoid". I understand where you are going with it now, it is NOT written that way. This is where poeple read things and get wrong imppessions.

I stand by the statement as written. If it is improperly read to exclude all other steps in a defense (something it does not say) I cannot control that. Shutting up does avoid conviction by reducing useful evidence, and that is a best rule to apply uniformly.

ArizonaShooting.com

Is it wise to "Clam up" after being involved in a shooting?

Who is online