Questions on Self-Defense

[Kimble]

Would the police handle the woman differently if the man she killed in self-defense (her boyfriend) was a known felon and currently suspected (maybe even under surveillance) of being involved in drug distribution? More specifically, would the police be concerned that there might be some retaliation against the woman from the dead boyfriend's associates?

It's possible. One important thing to consider is do the officers KNOW the woman acted in self defense? If she did so, but that fact isn't known, they aren't going to assume it's self defense without all the facts, and treat the homicide accordingly. If they knew it was self defense, as in they witnessed the acts leading up to and including the homicide while doing surveillance, and they had reason to believe that the boyfriend had associates who might retaliate, the officers would act to protect the woman if needed.

However, if the woman comes running out of the house with a bloody knife and says she just killed her boyfriend in self defense, and the officers don't know any facts outside of the fact that a woman with a bloody knife is closing in on them, they're going to draw down on her at gun point and order her to drop the knife.

Depends on the specifics of the situation and all the circumstances surrounding what is going on (known and unknown to the officers).

[retdetsgt]

Oh... one last add-on to the original series of self-defense questions.

Would the police handle the woman differently if the man she killed in self-defense (her boyfriend) was a known felon and currently suspected (maybe even under surveillance) of being involved in drug distribution? More specifically, would the police be concerned that there might be some retaliation against the woman from the dead boyfriend's associates?

Not really. The crime of homicide is specific only to what happened in that apt. If she was the girl friend, she'd know more as to whether she was in danger or not than we would. We wouldn't give her protection as such, she would be on her own for that. The best thing we can do is provide them with a police installed panic button that alerts our dispatch center. In thinking about it, if she were involved in the drug world, we probably wouldn't even to that. She'd probably steal it.

We have gang/drug related homicides all the time, if we provided protection behind any of those, that would take all our resources.

[retdetsgt]

Rather than edit again, I'll just add some stuff here. The more you add to the scenario, the more questions they'll be.

First, if she's living with a drug dealer and she just killed him, self defense or not, she's no babe in the woods. It takes some moxie to kill another human being and a lot of people are unable to do that. She just proved she could. I wouldn't spend 10 minutes worrying about her safety.

It would make the investigation a little more complex. Is it just a boy friend/girl friend fight over the cost of groceries or did the fight have something to do with the drugs? Is she involved in the dealing or just a trophy? You can get a lot from physical evidence and sometimes it will eliminate the possibility of self defense, but if it doesn't, then you have to look into the mind of the killer at the time. Is there a motive for killing him? What's their history together? Does she have a boy friend on the side? Does he have a girl friend stashed somewhere?

The key to investigating a homicide case is not only the physical evidence nor even just what the people tell you initially. You have to find out as much as you can about the history of the victim and the killer. You talk to as many friends, relatives, acquaintances and enemies as you can to get the best picture of the victim. Same with the killer, it's amazing what you find out about people and sometimes cases turn out to be nothing what they first seem.

[fictionwriter]

I can see how her living with a drug dealer would paint her as less than an upstanding citizen but here's the backstory:

She gets pregnant (with the drug dealer's baby). He tells her to get an abortion. She says okay. She changes her mind and he finds out about it later. He so pissed about her disobeying him that he beats the crap out of her. I mean, it's a savage beating. Before it can get any worse he gets a call on his cellphone. He calls a timeout on the beating but, before he answers the phone, he tells her since she didn't go to the clinic to take care of things "We'll just have to take care of it here".

He's already proven that he's capable of inflicting terrible physical trauma on her, so when she hears that last part she doesn't doubt that he means it. While he is on the phone she tries to make a run for the door. He grabs her, tosses her into a TV. She picks up a broken piece of metal and stabs him repeatedly, killing him.

She then calls 911 and says "I think I just killed my boyfriend". The police arrive, see him lying dead and see her beaten beyond belief and going into shock. She tells the officers the whole story.

With all the cards laid out like that, would this be an easily identified case of self-defense for the officers on the scene?

[retdetsgt]

It would be a good start, but if I were writing it, I'd have her slash him with a piece of glass and cut a caratoid artery or something. A pregnant woman who's already had the crap beat out of her would have a hard time stabbing the guy enough times to kill him, especially with just a piece of metal. A broken TV will give you glass, but not likely a piece of stray sharp metal. Unless you get the heart or brain, stabbing is a fairly slow way of killing someone. He would probably be able to fight back and probably take the weapon away from her and kill her first. But a slash that would make him lose blood rapidly would be more believable.

[retdetsgt]

Back to the problem of protection, she doesn't sound like someone who would follow instructions if we offered her anything. I fully realize people in relationships do odd things, but the fact she stayed with him even though he told her to get an abortion and she didn't, says loads. I seriously doubt this was the first time she'd been beaten, someone like that doesn't just flip out once and do that kind of assault on a pregnant woman once. This has to have happened before. Again, magical thinking causes some people to do stupid things like think he wouldn't kill his own baby, but she sounds like someone who can't be protected from her own bad decisions.

It's extremely rare to find someone like her who hasn't been a victim before. If you portray her as someone who has never made bad decisions up to this point, it wouldn't be at all believable. She would have to have known he was violent and it would take a true victim mentality to believe he wouldn't assault her if she didn't get the abortion.

[fictionwriter]

Oh... no worries, ret. She's made maaaaaaaany bad decisions before this situation, ret. That's kind of what the story's about.

Man, this place is great! Thank you so much for all the info.

[ChesCopPodz]

To answer your last question: no. It's just as possible that she was attempting to kill him first, and her injuries were the result of him defending himself. What actually happened will be revealed in the investigation. Unless there are hard facts proving self defense on her part, and not just her word, we can't assume that's what happened.

One rule tought to me when I was going through forensic school (my dept cross trains some officers as forensic techs), always consider a death a homocide and treat it as such until the investigation reveals otherwise. Even the 90 year old man home alone who dies in his sleep is treated as a homocide until I can rule it out.

[retdetsgt]

To answer your last question: no. It's just as possible that she was attempting to kill him first, and her injuries were the result of him defending himself. What actually happened will be revealed in the investigation. Unless there are hard facts proving self defense on her part, and not just her word, we can't assume that's what happened.

I tend to skip steps. But I wouldn't go so far as to say it's just as possible. In fact, that would be unusual, in my experience. I've seen some homicides where the woman tried to make it look like self defense, but their attempts were pretty crude.

If she's really beat up and he isn't, then she must have had a weapon to kill him, that's common sense. Now, if he's able to really thump her, to me there is little doubt that he could have gotten the weapon away from her. Using the scenario I suggested, she slash the caratoid artery with a piece of glass, he would have lost consciousness in a matter of seconds and bled out in minutes.

Her inflicting a fatal wound and then him beating her up and then dying is not impossible, but not likely at all. The only way I could think of it happening would be if she stabbed him in the gut and it took him quite a while to die. But even then, I would think his first thought would be to get help for himself first and retaliate later. A stab to the intestines is going to refocus just about anyone's attention.

In a homicide investigation, you rule out what you can, but you also have to look at what you can prove and disprove.... If you have only one live witness, you have to disprove her story. In this case, that would be pretty tough without substantial physical evidence to the contrary to remove any reasonable doubt. And reasonable doubt is what we have to overcome.

[Shamrock0211]

I am by no means a homicide detective and cannot speak to the intricacies of a homicide the way REDETSGT can. However my advice would be to research the actual Penal Code citation for what is considered self defense and what is not in the State you are writing about. I am getting the feeling you are here in order to avoid the "oh that could NEVER happen because of XYZ" reaction from a reader, particularly one who is in law enforcement.

I would research the elements for defense in which the defendant must prove (the burden is on the defendant) in order to claim self defense. It will normally be something like "would a reasonable person believe that they were in fear for their life at the time of the incident." But this will vary from State to State. Then you can write your story around those elements thus avoiding the "that could never happen because....." argument. I am assuming in your story you DO NOT want her charged so she can go on to do whatever (time travel, fly a zeppelin, become a gator wrestling champ, etc). Maybe you could tie in a conversation between the DA and the detectives as to why the DA is declining prosecution based on Self Defense and actually cite the elements....just thinking out loud here....

Not trying to write your story for you or anything

Now onto our demands: Now when this is all done I hope I will open open the cover and see "thanks to everyone at Real Police for all your help.

Also I expect a free copy of this story when it is done. And I expect a cameo in the movie when the deal comes! I want to be the young renegade cop who has a love interest with Cameron Diaz and is always getting chewed out by REDETSGT for my screwball antics. Also I want to hang from the skid of a helicopter at least once and never be shown doing paperwork.

[retdetsgt]

Good points.... Especially the last paragraph, except Cameron Diaz dumps you for the more experienced retdetsgt!:D

When I went into homicide, I was fortunate to work with a guy who had a lot of experience and taught me a lot. One of things he drummed into my head was that our first job is to learn the truth. And that entails working just as hard to prove someone innocent as we do to prove them guilty. That serves two purposes, someone doesn't get wrongly convicted and we don't get embarrassed by a defense attorney in court.

One case in point. A man hears someone breaking into his pickup parked in his driveway in the middle of the night. It's an older neighborhood, the truck is parked in front of a one car garage with retaining walls on each side of the vehicle. He corners a 15 yr old kid between the front of the vehicle and the garage door with his shotgun. That's all I know when I arrive at about 4 in the morning.

The kid is dead, laying about midway the length of the truck, between it and the retaining wall. The homeowner's neighbor is a lawyer who tells him not to talk to us. There is nothing on the ground or in the kid's hand that could be used as a weapon. On the surface, this is not good for the homeowner. In Oregon, you can't use deadly force to protect property and this kid wasn't armed nor big enough to pose a threat to the homeowner.

We put the guy in a holding cell in detectives while we attend the autopsy at 9 that morning. The kid is shot in the side, just below the rib cage and the exit wound is on the other side. I checked his clothing and found the side pocket of his jacket had a hole in it and was full of powder residue. The barrel of the shotgun was inside the pocket when the gun went off.

Given the location of the body, the entrance wound, etc. it appeared clear the kid was trying to get past the homeowner through a narrow area. The end of the shotgun went in the pocket, causing the shotgun to jerk in the man's hands. The normal reaction would be to squeeze the gun to retain control of it. If he had his finger on the trigger, boom.

Is that the way it happened? I believe so, but I don't know for sure, no one does. But it casts more than enough reasonable doubt that the man intended to kill the kid. I contacted the DA and he concurred that the man had a substantial defense. I went back to detectives and let him go.

Too often we get so concerned with making an arrest, we don't do the necessary footwork to get to the real truth.

The FBI here just got embarrassed by that. They arrested a retired school teacher for bank robbery based only on the fact he looked like the bank photos. They apparently spent little time trying to really find out what happened because a week later they let him go. He had bank deposit records that showed he was across the state at the time. The first thing I would have done would have been to see if he had an alibi. Obviously, that wasn't their priority.

There was so much pressure from the media to catch this guy, they wanted to clear it more than they wanted the truth, I guess. The real robber was caught a few weeks later by local police down in Eugene. I'm sure our tax dollars more than compensated the retired teacher for a sloppy investigation.:rolleyes: