Uechi-Ryu.com

_________________
Van

Excellent posts, Van.

_________________
Rick Wilson - http://wpd-rc.com/

Thanks, Rick. As you well know there is so much to this and so it is important that we talk about it in detail as often as we can...so feel free.

The biggest hurdle will be the physical-psychological shock pervading a person during the encountering, enduring, and evading a life threatening violent attack_ I know you and I have had some personal experience with this_
there will be _ Confusion ...a state of mind commonly experienced by an intended victim who has survived a life or death encounter,be it a defensive situation or a sudden terrible accident.

I have investigated dozens upon dozens of fatalities of every kind, just about...in my work as a catastrophic investigator. I would get calls 24/7 to immediately respond to the scene of the events, finding myself in the midst of chaos along with police and Osha investigators.

The most common reaction of the 'parties to the event' was utter confusion,
including remembering events out of sequence, exaggerating the importance of triviality, forgetting important events due to short term memory loss, and blabbing nonsense to investigators later denied to have been said. Everyone thinks they will be the exception, but it never is.

Also what people don't realize is that _physically_ the adrenalin rush which supercharged the body has given way to a precipitous decline in energy, and a foggy mindstate.

All the people the person may have talked to, immediately after the event, will be subjected to subpoena to testify as to what they heard. This is admissible as evidence because of the 'Res Gestae' exception of the hearsay rule....

[Latin, Things done.] Secondhand statements considered trustworthy for the purpose of admission as evidence in a lawsuit when repeated by a witness because they were made spontaneously and concurrently with an event.

I have written here on the forum...some frightening examples of this.

_________________
Van

When you shoot somebody, unless you have ice water in your veins, you will be going through various stress reactions. Some of you may be in shock, others will be distraught that they just took a life, others may be enraged that some bad guy just threatened their children, but whatever your reaction, you will not be in a calm state of mind.

It is a medical fact that adrenalin affects our higher brain functions. You will tend to forget details, some of which may be very important, or even worse, your brain will fill in the forgotten blanks with facts that will later be shown to be incorrect.

_________________
Van

A law school professor (and former criminal defense attorney) as well as a police officer (to present from LEO's side) -- tell you why you should never agree to be interviewed by the police.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

Very informative

_________________
Rick Wilson - http://wpd-rc.com/

Thanks, Rick. Have seen this one before, but everytime I see it again, i learn something new.

The problem here is that in reality...sticking to what we know we should not do/say...to the police_is almost an impossibility as we will be a different person at that moment than we are now. In the grip of mental turmoil it is like we want to ...need to...tell our side of the story to whomever will listen.

_________________
Van

Hi Rick,

As you might remember, in the past I have covered the adrenaline factor with Peyton Quinn/Bill Kipp.

Peyton has this DVD out...which was sent to me for free. I will review it and give an opinion.

http://bulletproofdefensedvd.com/?AFFID=91025

_________________
Van

Look forward to your reveiw Van



They mention in the link the reasonable Man theory , I endorse the concept of establishing the unreasonableness of the attacker .

I teach this as simply a call to action , to act on messages and be assertive under duress.

while I say assertive I do not mean aggresive , too establish a fence , declare your boundrys and awareness and concerns , and make any further action on the EBG part a clear escalation .

in the decision making process this is the orient step , if you cannot remove yourself from the threat , establishing there unreasonableness is the next step(if they are hindering your escape or attacking such unreasonableness has been established you can move straight to decision/tactics/action)

this is not a conversation , but a search for information , all physical and verbal ques need to be heard , a establishment of right .

this is a difficult and highly debatable area , and far more to do with ones own personality than tactics , but the facts are action brings satisfaction , and is the simplest tool to deal with anxiety , and to aid awareness the task to orient the simplest IMHO.

personal skills abilitys , de-escalation tactics , pattern interupts , etc etc can all be used , but the goal is always to orient and establish intent/need.

teaching self defence from any other veiw point is irresposnisble and flawed IMHO .

there are many other factors and angles , but probably better not discussed on the internet and for more personal transission , as misunderstanding could be worse than knowing nothing .

It is no con-incidence that the reasonable man measure is also a legal measure

your self defence contract should mirror your beleifs and ideally the legal system you operate under , to teach responsibly it must mirror the legal system you operate under .

how you compose yourself set boundrys and relate and orient are skills right throughout life , and theres lots of room for practice .

Really good post Marcus.

Van you are correct we want to tell out side and not look guilty by staying silent.

The various media has made refusing to answer a question an admission of guilt.

So we should at least strive to keep it simple – I was defending myself – BUT after saying that we then must be able to back up that it was reasonable to do so because we just pleaded guilty.

But here’s the problem- here we are a bunch of at minimum martial artists struggle to grasp this concept of violence and how to perceive it and survive it.

We not only want to understand it but we want to study it and those taking part in a self defence reality forum want the dirty muddy crappy truth about it all.

And we struggle, we disagree and we discuss.

So what does the average person who might be sitting on your jury understand?

People still think cops should shoot guns out of people’s hands not understanding how many shots miss even centre mass at 10 feet under stress.

How do we articulate to those who have no grasp of violence other than the fantasy of TV, movies and books the reality of what happened when we struggle here with even each other and we all have some understanding and are searching for more?

JUST how articulate will we have to be?

_________________
Rick Wilson - http://wpd-rc.com/

Get yourself a lawyer son better get a real good one.

its a good point Rick , how well are you going to be able to express/justify what you felt/did.

Rick, Stryke_

Really good posts, thank you. Think for a moment what anyone of us, now discussing these matters on this forum, will feel like after surviving an attack.

There we are, traumatized physically and mentally in police custody, our faculties seemingly diminishing, all kinds of fears emerging which include fear of entrapment, fear of not being able to speak coherently, fear of not being understood, fear of being misunderstood, fear of going to jail, fear of losing all your savings…it goes on and on in your foggy brain_ while under police interrogation and being recorded.

There will be a deep feeling of loneliness, of dismay…you want to go home but you can't and you don’t know when you will ever be able to. You are now a trapped animal.

It is at that moment that you are likely to say things without even knowing you said them…because you just want out of this torture of confinement and emotional pounding, dry mouth and cold sweat running down your armpits.

I have seen grown men just break down and cry during a simple legal deposition in civil discovery cases.

It also helps to understand how police interrogations are conducted, i.e., the 'Reid Technique' that most of us are not familiar with.

http://people.howstuffworks.com/police- ... ation2.htm

Few points to keep in mind:

1. You will be interrupted:

"It should be noted here that in the United States, if at any point during the interrogation the suspect does somehow manage to ask for a lawyer or invoke his right to silence, the interrogation has to stop immediately. That's why it's so important to interrupt the suspect's attempts to speak in the initial stages -- if he invokes his rights, the interrogation is over."

2. " When You've Got Company
The Just Cause Law Collective warns that if you're arrested with friends, you've got to keep a cool head. Decide beforehand that no one's going to say a word until everyone has a lawyer, and remind yourself that police will try to play on the natural paranoia that arises when people are separated. The Collective offers a further warning regarding a group arrest: When you have your strategy discussion, don't do it in the back seat of a police car. If the officers stuffed you all into one car and walked away, they're recording you. "

3. Confrontation
The detective presents the facts of the case and informs the suspect of the evidence against him. This evidence might be real, or it might be made up.

The detective typically states in a confident manner that the suspect is involved in the crime. The suspect's stress level starts increasing, and the interrogator may move around the room and invade the suspect's personal space to increase the discomfort.

If the suspect starts fidgeting, licking his lips and or grooming himself (running his hand through his hair, for instance), the detective takes these as indicators of deception and knows he's on the right track.

4. Getting the suspect's attention
At this point, the suspect should be frustrated and unsure of himself. He may be looking for someone to help him escape the situation. The interrogator tries to capitalize on that insecurity by pretending to be the suspect's ally.

He'll try to appear even more sincere in his continued theme development, and he may get physically closer to the suspect to make it harder for the suspect to detach from the situation. The interrogator may offer physical gestures of camaraderie and concern, such as touching the suspect's shoulder or patting his back.

5. This the most critical:

" The suspect loses resolve
If the suspect's body language indicates surrender -- his head in his hands, his elbows on his knees, his shoulders hunched -- the interrogator seizes the opportunity to start leading the suspect into confession.

He'll start transitioning from theme development to motive alternatives (see the next step) that force the suspect to choose a reason why he committed the crime. At this stage, the interrogator makes every effort to establish eye contact with the suspect to increase the suspect's stress level and desire to escape. If, at this point, the suspect cries, the detective takes this as a positive indicator of guilt."



~~

Ask...how well will I really do?

Trainers in the LFI programs told us to actually place our fingers in our mouth and keep the tongue from flapping.

_________________
Van

_________________
Van

_________________
Van

_________________
Van

_________________
Van