• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Senator Stuart incorrectly claims that VA has a "duty to retreat"

paramedic70002

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
1,440
Location
Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
Author of VA's failed Castle Doctrine legislation apparently doesn't understand VA's Common Law that he was trying to Codify.

http://news.fredericksburg.com/news...is-clearly-spelled-out/#.Ufb4DnK--IA.facebook

Mr. Hawes sets him straight in the comments!

“We do have a duty to retreat in Virginia,” Stuart added. “If you are threatened, and you have the ability to retreat and remove yourself from the threat, then you’ve got a responsibility to do that before you shoot to kill.”

Daniel L. Hawes, Esq.17 hours ago

1. "Stand your ground" law is not related to the "castle doctrine"; the former is a rule ancillary to the law of self defense and the latter is about defense of one's habitation and dwelling. So the third paragraph in the article is nonsense.
2. Both "stand your ground" and the "castle doctrine" are part of Virginia law. The fact that there is no specific statute in the Code regarding these principles is irrelevant, because they are common law precepts, included by reference by Va. Code sections 1-200 and 1-201. Most of the law of Virginia is NOT in the Code. The proposed statutes introduced in 2012 were labelled "castle doctrine" bills but would actually have limited the rights of Virginians drastically; that's why they were not passed.

3. Home defense and self defense are two different areas of law; they do not have the same elements and are not governed by the same principles. Both are more complex than would be suggested by the article, but there is no requirement for a specific threat to life in either. You cannot use deadly force to defend "mere" property; but a dwelling is not "mere" property, and different rules apply to defense of the home than other areas or things in which one may have a property interest. In fact, there is no requirement, in defending one's home, that he have any property interest in the home at all.

4. There is no general duty to retreat in the law of self defense. That duty only arises in the "imperfect" form of the law of self defense, in which the person defending was at fault in initiating the conflict that led to the attack. I summarize the "perfect" form this way: "If a person reasonably believes, based on objective fact, that he or another innocent person, is faced with the imminent threat of serious bodily injury, then he may use whatever force he believes is reasonably necessary, up to and including deadly force, to stop that threat."

Comment by Daniel L. Hawes, Esq. (www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com)
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
With all due respect to the Senator, the problem could be with the staff writer either misquoting or over editing what he said.
 

scouser

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
1,341
Location
804, VA
Don't correct him .... let him remain in his dream world...

The problem with that is it does no one else any good at all. Surely it's better that everyone who reads it sees for themselves just how wrong his statements are, rather than being left to believe he is speaking the truth.
 

Lolcanoe

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
Messages
86
Location
Hampton
The amount of people I work with have no clue about VA laws. It also wouldn't surprise me if they read that article and believed it. Anyone know if sen. Stuart has any plans on correcting what he said?
 
Last edited:

arentol

New member
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
383
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
The above statement is made a bit ambiguous by the use of both duty and responsibility.

Maybe he is confused between retreating being the responsible thing to do in many situations, and it being an actual legal duty.



Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
The above statement is made a bit ambiguous by the use of both duty and responsibility.

Maybe he is confused between retreating being the responsible thing to do in many situations, and it being an actual legal duty.



Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

If you are part of the problem, you must retreat as much as possible in order to claim an excusable defense.

[h=4]Justifiable And Excusable Homicide[/h] Justifiable homicide in self-defense occurs where a person, without any fault on his part in provoking or bringing on the difficulty, kills another under reasonable apprehension of death or great bodily harm to himself.

Excusable homicide in self-defense occurs where the accused, although in some fault in the first instance in provoking or bringing on the difficulty, when attacked retreats as far as possible, announces his desire for peace, and kills his adversary from a reasonably apparent necessity to preserve his own life or save himself from great bodily harm.

Bailey v. Commonwealth, 200 Va. 92, 96, 104 S.E.2d 28, (1958).
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
But the Senator was not discussing imperfect self defense.

We hold each other to a rather high standard here when someone makes a bald-faced statement that X "always" exists/applies.

Why anybody would be willing to let someone responsible to writing and enactingt the laws we must live with and abide by get by with a lower standard utterly flabberghasts me.

stay safe.
 

va_tazdad

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
1,162
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Ahhh.... there in lies the rub

But the Senator was not discussing imperfect self defense.

We hold each other to a rather high standard here when someone makes a bald-faced statement that X "always" exists/applies.

Why anybody would be willing to let someone responsible to writing and enactingt the laws we must live with and abide by get by with a lower standard utterly flabberghasts me.

stay safe.

WE don't. Unfortunately, others DO. ;>)
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
The amount of people I work with have no clue about VA laws. It also wouldn't surprise me if they read that article and believed it. Anyone know if sen. Stuart has any plans on correcting what he said?
I dropped the reporter an e-mail advising her of the error and suggesting that the Senator might want to clarify.

Crickets.

TFred
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
I dropped the reporter an e-mail advising her of the error and suggesting that the Senator might want to clarify.

Crickets.

TFred

Liberal crickets - conservative crickets would eat holes in her socks while they waited.
 
Top