Uechi-Ryu.com

Good points Mike

I think, possibly, the girl whose cigarette was 'bogarted' [I like that word] must have been in the Gambo's group of friends out for the night in the beautiful city of Brockton after hours. [more often than not, after a workout at Bethoney's dojo, I would be approached by young prostitutes, on the way to my car, " Do you want a date tonight?"

Yeah, right.

As you and Roy point out…any of us can end up in a similar snakes' pit by an inadvertent number of ways …if not intentional faux pas.

I see the law as the 'enemy' today…in my work I have had to attend criminal and civil trials as well as having taken the stand on many occasions to testify as to my investigations.

A most revolting experience to say the least.

The reason why I think that Roy's symposium should be extremely educational for us all.

There has to be a way to keep that 'particular enemy' at bay…while doing the right thing.

_________________
Van

Lopes also signed a police confession from what I read.

I can imagine how difficult it can be for anyone, locked into a confused state of mind in the aftermath _and even more daunting_ in the grip of cognitive dissonance while under skilled police interrogations utilizing that emotional chasm.


http://www.examiner.com/skepticism-in-n ... ity-review

~~

Who's the real enemy...or how many enemies do you see in a fight?

And how do you fight a 300 lbs thug ensconced in shock absorbers?

Oh...I know...

_________________
Van

It is so refreshing to have people who have actually had an authentic punch in the nose once or twice weigh in on this.

I wrote the Lopes story factually, but used narrative style to try and create conversation about the salient points that challenge nearly every self-defense, defense. Often when we try to apply our morality to an event such as this and we find ourselves questioning our commitment to a guilty or not guilty verdict. Some argue, well you know Lopes did deserve something for taking the girls cigarette -- but you know, maybe the first punch-but not the second, I mean, maybe the second but definitely the jacket thing was out of line....I mean maybe he shoulda...well maybe...

Morality cannot be the basis of a legal conclusion regarding self-defense. A model must be developed and established within this area of law to determine the reasonableness of one's actions. This model theory has been used by law enforcement officers for decades. It is well established, well reasoned, and we can borrow from it to develop a civilian version.

I am afraid that this is the biggest problem with self-defense laws --that there is no model in place to determine with any level of certainty whether a use of force is appropriate. We leave it up to untrained people to interpret the event from their own limited paradigm (most people have never received an authentic punch in the nose). For sure the ivory tower law school prosecutor hasn't. Nor has the Ivy league judge. Then the court battles to keep out "experts" who can explain combat and describe the cognitive and physiological features that can help educate the jury and help them make valid conclusions from the evidence presented. Most cops have been in plenty of fights, but as Van noted, they often use a singular heuristic analysis when investigating crime. It goes something like this 1. A crime has been committed 2. I must find out who committed the crime 3. When I find out who, it is my job to arrest him.
Police most often see exactly what they expect to .

This simplistic law enforcement formula works for 98% of crime, where there is no alternative explanation for certain depraved acts. You simply can't get support in statute for the commission of rape, burglary, robbery, etc.

But for nearly all "combat crimes"" -- assault, battery, murder-- there may be an alternative justification. It might be that the person was using these behaviors as a measure of self- defense. It is interesting to note that the behaviors that represent the aforementioned crimes are identical to the behaviors one would expect to find in a justifiable use of self-defense (intentional striking, use of deadly weaponry, intentional attacks to vital areas, etc.) Self Defense is mirror image of certain combat crimes.

For this reason, cops need to "ask the right questions" and many of them don't. As part of our criticism of the criminal justice system we must be aware that police are not trained to get exculpatory information, only inculpatory information. It isn't the cops; it is built into the investigatory system starting at the academy level. So--once an officer arrests someone, with few exceptions a prosecutor WILL prosecute that someone; often rabidly and viciously. In most criminal cases you want your prosecutors to be like that--but in self-defense cases the rabid prosecution can keep a defendant in jail for years. Lopes was arrested June 6, 2009. Lopes won his case June 21, 2011 due only to the excellent work of his Atty. John Connors who was able to present factual evidentary items to the jury and show them how and why his client was defending himself. This he did in the face of an aggressive prosecutor AND judge who pigeonholed him every step of the way. I am certain that without the exceptional representation of Mr. Connors, Lopes would have gone to Prison for Murder.

One of my chapters in the Winner Goes to Jail discusses another civilian self-defense case I worked on as an expert in use of force, defensive tactics and combat stress for Augustine Wylie from Ft Myers, Florida. After killing his assailant "Gus" sat in jail for three years while his attorney and I battled with the Prosecutor(s) in a variety of motions spread out across that three year span. We presented a model of force, and discussed critical incident stress, we invalidated the police interview (due to the timeframe in which it was taken) and showed artifacts of physiological response to life/death situations exhibited by Gus during his initial statement. As one of the oldest sciences in the world, combat stress and the fight/flight response is all too often still viewed by the court as a "junk science," a testament to how out of touch most folks in the criminal justice system are with respect to understanding self-defense and the physiological effects one experiences when fighting for his life. Gus won his case but lost three years of his life.

Try to imagine how packed the prisons are by less fortunate souls.

_________________
RRB
Okay,who stopped payment on my reality check?

Thanks Roy, quite chilling indeed.

I take it the Ft Myers case occurred prior to the new laws in Florida regarding 'criminal and civil immunity' in bonafide self defense actions?

Or would it have made any difference?

1.

We have seen this problem even here on the forums in the past when I would bring out the value of certain experts…

What is the threat feared by the use of experts?

2.

Most of us will fall prey to this legal aberration to be sure in the emotional chaos of the aftermath while in the clutches of police interrogators, and will be persuaded to blabber about just about anything.
How can we train our emotions not to help imprison us forever?

3.

You confirm that the courts/legal system are the real enemy. It seems that fighting judges' ineptitude is a losing battle to say the least.

And most defense lawyers don't have the skills of an attorney such as John Connors. And even if finding one…the cost of defense alone can impoverish one _of his life savings.

What can a person really do to protect himself in the face of such foreseeable oddities?

4.

This is interesting that you were able to invalidate the police interview/confession…if you will…because of the timeframe of it following the event. But it must have taken lots of work to undo this serious problem all of us will face in the aftermath.

So true. You might recall we saw the same incredulity here on my forum years ago when I first introduced the fight or flight phenomena…in fact some Uechi people rebutted that such things did not apply to Uechi masters and so on.

I would also agree that many criminal defense lawyers don't have a clue to this essential knowledge and need to be schooled to remain effective in the court room against aggressive ignorant judges and prosecutors hell bent at making a name for themselves, at the expense of an innocent defendant.

Is there a way to hold such legal servants responsible for their capriciousness?

_________________
Van

And this is what should make us all stand up and take notice because it is so true.

_________________
Van

The Verdict...1982 movie with Paul Newman.....

_________________
Van

_________________
Van

You do need to be a magician....

http://www.flixxy.com/worlds-fastest-magician.htm

_________________
Van

I just want to drop a note and say thank you to Van, Roy, and everyone else who's had some experience in these matters and is willing to share. Even if I don't have anything constructive to post, it's still appreciated.

_________________
Life begins & ends cold, naked & covered in crap.

Most welcome, my friend...I learn everyday...and Roy is a great teacher.

_________________
Van

_________________
Van

_Robison...Suarez Intl

_________________
Van

Robison...Suarez Intnl

_________________
Van

Posted by Don Robison on 06/24/2011 at 10:44 in GUNFIGHTING , TRADECRAFT |

_________________
Van

I've also passed this on to a number of attorneys...

But the thing that keeps going trough my head is that I wish I knew where a few peace officers were (or even their names) from years ago that literally saved me from having to go through this in the aftermath... I can't call the attorney that gave me the advice all those years ago... he's passed on... but the advice has served me well. As Van-Sensei knows, similar advice comes from folks like Mas Ayoob. I'm certain there are a lot of things that would be different for me without the "right" responding officer or the "right" legal advice that changed a number of situations... mainly for the better.

Regardless, it's what led me here to this and I can't complain. (too much... I'm a natural "complainer" sometimes... )