Rick
Quote:
ONE MASSIVELY IMPORTANT point that came through to me loud and clear reading Rory’s material which seems obvious once you focus on it but is often missed – self defence is an affirmative defence.
This means you are admitting to the act of assault/homicide – you are guilty of the act and the courts no longer have any burden to prove that. YOUR defence is that you were justified in committing the assault/homicide BUT now the burden is on you to prove that in court.
A civil court may not be as cut and dried as criminal nor are they required to find in your favour just because you were acquitted in criminal court.
So once again I want to stress that anything you say that could be taken very differently than you intended can be used against you. Facts can be disputed but most often it is emotionally charged statements that are distorted.
This is indeed something we need to continuosly keep uppermost in our minds. There are many 'sliced fine' opinions out there.
The most crucial part of this, as Rick points out, is what we tell the police after an event, when we tell the police, how we tell the police,and where do we tell the police.
All this while trapped in emotional chaos where your worst enemy now is your tongue trying to wildly flap out of your mouth.
Let's examine a few legal details:
http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2012/0 ... fense.htmlQuote:
What's an affirmative defense?
An affirmative defense is a justification for the defendant having committed the accused crime. It differs from other defenses because the defendant admits that he did, in fact, break the law. He is simply arguing that he has a good reason for having done so, and therefore should be excused from all criminal liability.
In criminal trials, the most common affirmative defenses include self-defense, defense of others and insanity. Duress, entrapment and involuntary intoxication are used less often.
To see how one of these defenses works, let's look at the pending Trayvon Martin trial. George Zimmerman will undoubtedly argue that he acted in self-defense as defined by Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law. There's absolutely no question that he killed Martin. If he can successfully prove he acted in self-defense, the law says he cannot be convicted of murder. He will go free.