That costs a bit of money...carlson1 wrote:The only problem I guess I have is I do not "have a lawyer." I wonder if it is smart to have one on retainer?
But it may be good to have one (lawyer) on speed dial...
Overnight shooting in Houston, 1/6/2006
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
-
stevie_d_64
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 7590
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:17 pm
- Location: 77504
But it may be good to have one (lawyer) on speed dial...
"Perseverance and Preparedness triumph over Procrastination and Paranoia every time.” -- Steve
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!
-
one eyed fatman
- Banned
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:50 pm
- Location: Tx
-
Charles L. Cotton
- Site Admin
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 17787
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
Carlson1:
I agree with much of the advice you were given, disagree with some, and some is just a matter of personal preference. "Should I make a statement to the police" was the topic that spawned a free legal seminar on the use of deadly force at PSC a few months back. Those who attended learned the statutory and case law on deadly force, as well as some general recommendations, but more importantly, they learned that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to how you should or even can handle the investigation into a self-defense shooting.
Here is a correct global statement: talk to the media and you are asking for trouble. “I worked too hard for what I have� is not a statement the Grand Jury will ever hear from my lips! Forgo your 15 minutes of fame and concentrate on not letting a righteous self-defense shooting go sour by making ill-advised comments to the media, or anyone else for that matter.
When we speak of making a statement to the police we are actually dealing with at least two opportunities to make a statement. The first will be to the responding officer who will simply ask what happened. The second and subsequent opportunities will be during the full investigation of the incident.
I personally will not remain totally silent when a responding officer asks what happened. I would give a very short statement of the facts, without any editorial comments. I don’t want his report to read something like this: “I asked the subject what happened and he just stared at me, refusing to provide any information.� If he or she wanted more information than contained in my brief explanation, I’d offer to give a more detailed statement after I had the chance to calm down. Anyone involved in a shooting is going to be suffering from the natural physical effects of a life-or-death encounter. Often, LEO’s involved in shooting will give slightly different accounts of the events in statements given some time apart. It isn’t that they are lying; it’s just that when adrenalin dump is over and they are thinking more clearly, they remember things they didn’t mention earlier, or realize they made an inaccurate statement. This phenomenon isn’t limited to LEO’s, we are all susceptible, but when someone reads differing accounts, they presume you are lying.
Notice I said what I would do. I’m a trial attorney so I’m used to speaking in stressful environments and making impromptu statements to judges, other counsel and to witnesses in front of a jury. If someone is less experienced at doing this, or for whatever reason is not confident they can give only a brief statement of the facts, then perhaps they would be better off simply responding to the officer by saying “I’m too upset to talk right now.�
Regardless how I would respond to the first officer on the scene, I absolutely would not make a further statement without having my attorney present. Yes, I’m a lawyer and I have an attorney. The old adage “he who represents himself has a fool for a client� applies equally to attorneys!
The bottom line is we are not looking for ways to commit a murder and get away with it, we just don’t want a legally justifiable shooting to become a problem because we tried to give a full explanation of the events at a time when we simply are incapable of giving such detail accurately.
Regards,
Chas.
I agree with much of the advice you were given, disagree with some, and some is just a matter of personal preference. "Should I make a statement to the police" was the topic that spawned a free legal seminar on the use of deadly force at PSC a few months back. Those who attended learned the statutory and case law on deadly force, as well as some general recommendations, but more importantly, they learned that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to how you should or even can handle the investigation into a self-defense shooting.
Here is a correct global statement: talk to the media and you are asking for trouble. “I worked too hard for what I have� is not a statement the Grand Jury will ever hear from my lips! Forgo your 15 minutes of fame and concentrate on not letting a righteous self-defense shooting go sour by making ill-advised comments to the media, or anyone else for that matter.
When we speak of making a statement to the police we are actually dealing with at least two opportunities to make a statement. The first will be to the responding officer who will simply ask what happened. The second and subsequent opportunities will be during the full investigation of the incident.
I personally will not remain totally silent when a responding officer asks what happened. I would give a very short statement of the facts, without any editorial comments. I don’t want his report to read something like this: “I asked the subject what happened and he just stared at me, refusing to provide any information.� If he or she wanted more information than contained in my brief explanation, I’d offer to give a more detailed statement after I had the chance to calm down. Anyone involved in a shooting is going to be suffering from the natural physical effects of a life-or-death encounter. Often, LEO’s involved in shooting will give slightly different accounts of the events in statements given some time apart. It isn’t that they are lying; it’s just that when adrenalin dump is over and they are thinking more clearly, they remember things they didn’t mention earlier, or realize they made an inaccurate statement. This phenomenon isn’t limited to LEO’s, we are all susceptible, but when someone reads differing accounts, they presume you are lying.
Notice I said what I would do. I’m a trial attorney so I’m used to speaking in stressful environments and making impromptu statements to judges, other counsel and to witnesses in front of a jury. If someone is less experienced at doing this, or for whatever reason is not confident they can give only a brief statement of the facts, then perhaps they would be better off simply responding to the officer by saying “I’m too upset to talk right now.�
Regardless how I would respond to the first officer on the scene, I absolutely would not make a further statement without having my attorney present. Yes, I’m a lawyer and I have an attorney. The old adage “he who represents himself has a fool for a client� applies equally to attorneys!
The bottom line is we are not looking for ways to commit a murder and get away with it, we just don’t want a legally justifiable shooting to become a problem because we tried to give a full explanation of the events at a time when we simply are incapable of giving such detail accurately.
Regards,
Chas.
-
dws1117
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 1759
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 11:54 pm
- Location: Spring, TX.
Thanks for the reminder, Charles. The legal was very informative. It vertainly presented me with alot to think about.
You think that there may be a possibility of making something like the legal seminar an annual event. I am certain the most of the ones who attended the first would be glad to pay $25 or $50 and consider it money well spent.
As for the topic, I would hope that I would give a brief explation of the evens as they occured to the arriving officer then politely tell them that I will be happy to talk more after I've had time to calm down and speak with a lawyer.
You think that there may be a possibility of making something like the legal seminar an annual event. I am certain the most of the ones who attended the first would be glad to pay $25 or $50 and consider it money well spent.
As for the topic, I would hope that I would give a brief explation of the evens as they occured to the arriving officer then politely tell them that I will be happy to talk more after I've had time to calm down and speak with a lawyer.