“You can shoot with the left hand just as well as the right hand for close range.”
That is a basis for a criminal trial. Not a wrongful death suit. Different field of play.
“The aggressor was a lethal and immediate threat the instant he stepped out of his vehicle with a gun in hand.”
Not neccessarily. He could have gone the other way. Remember, this is a suit, not a criminal trial. If the plaintiff’s lawyers can prove the shooter was contributory to the death, it is a paid injury and depending on the state, how the reward will be given. In California, for instanse, killing someone who is imminently endangering your life is a key to stand your ground scenerios. Any contributory action by the shooter can be a problem in the suit. And he being the only shooter and the only person to obviously aim a gun are strikes against him.
“It was a good self-defense shoot.”
Not with what I see. We can’t see the angle of the gun in his left hand as it is behind his body. But if the gun was not aimed at the shooter, the guy outside the car is allowed to carry a gun if he has a permit and has no liability to dispose of it. Anger does not fill the descriuption of threat by itself. And this is why I think it may get interesting.
wy69
I agree. Depending upon the skill of the DA and the ignorance of the jury, this guy could go to prison.
As a blanket statement, that is not correct in any State.
The aggressor was brandishing his weapon - which itself is a crime in many States. And he punched the driver with weapon in hand.
He did not need to point his weapon at the driver. He had just committed an assault and battery with a firearm in hand. That made him an imminent lethal threat in the laws of every State.
Yes, I had to take some training in self-defense laws. I am very certain of my interpretation. But you can check Andrew Branca, "The Law of Self Defense" pp 58 (The AOJ Triad) for a more complete explanation. That was our textbook.
As a civil suit this is not going to go anywhere.
Neither the facts, nor the law supports a "wrongful death" civil judgement against the driver where this event occurred. That might not stop a predatory lawyer from trying but odds of a jackpot award are very low. Lawyers for civil cases are in it for the money and do not pursue cases where the odds of favorable settlement are poor.
I understand from the limited report that the aggressor is of Indian ancestry (dot, not feather). So, getting a mostly Black jury that wants to punish some mean old White man for shooting a Black man isn't going to work very well.