• 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.

Man accused of killing fisherman will claim self-defense.

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
A fisherman was killed after a yelling match between a group of people and a fisherman on the other side of the StCroix river. The accused is from Minnesota.The defense lawyer will claim Wisconsin's castle doctrine to justify the shooting. I am flabbergasted! The lawyer is going to claim that the fisherman from the other side of the river posed a threat to his client! Besides even if the fisherman was on the same side, how can the castle doctrine be applied when the accuser was being inflammatory? The lawyer probably means Stand your ground law in public.
Castle doctrine: allows a person certain permissions to protect their home (or “castle”) using force, including deadly force.

Stand your ground:is a law that authorizes a person to protect and defend one's own life and limb against threat or perceived threat. This law states that an individual has no duty to retreat from any place he/she has a lawful right to be and may use any level of force, including lethal, if he/she reasonably believes he/she faces an imminent and immediate threat of serious bodily harm or death; this is as opposed to duty to retreat laws.

There is a difference between the two though both apply on your 'private property'.

We shall see....

http://www.piercecountyherald.com/n...-fisherman-will-claim-self-defense-when-trial
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Well, you have to present some defense. Beats me if he'll beat the rap.

I would not find him guilty myself. From what I have read which is limited.
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
It is a "No Duty to Retreat" law. Those against our rights to self-defense call it a "Stand Your Ground" law. Don't help them with those negative connotations.

It sounds as if he is arguing Castle Doctrine, though, but will have to demonstrate how a man on the other side of the river is manifesting this under the state laws. This is jurisdictionally quite interesting!
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Just how wide is the river at that point?

Among a zillion and a half other pieces of information missing to be able to make sense of this.

stay safe.
 

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Location
, ,
LEO always seem to claim self defense when they murder someone. Errrr, I mean 'defend' themselves.

Good for goose, good for gander?
 
Last edited:

Wstar425

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2014
Messages
570
Location
Tomahawk and Abbotsford, Wi.
Just how wide is the river at that point?

Among a zillion and a half other pieces of information missing to be able to make sense of this.

stay safe.

Used to live in Balsam Lake two years ago. St. Croix is pretty narrow, 100-300 feet wide, maybe less in spots. Balsam Lake is county seat of Polk County. River very scenic south of St. Croix Falls, less so north.

Yeah, the story really doesn't tell you any info needed to determine much. First I've heard of it. I don't see how you would be in much danger from someone on the other side of the river, EXCEPT from gun fire.
 

bnhcomputing

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
1,709
Location
Wisconsin, USA
Castle Doctrine ~may~ apply

Wisconsin castle doctrine includes the vehicle. Articles on the net imply there was a confrontation, and both parties were in the same parking area. As the accused was trying to leave in his vehicle, the decedent attempted to forcibly enter the vehicle.

Interestingly, the Castle Doctrine was not designed to be "used as a defense." Rather, it was supposed to shift the burden of proof BACK to the state in a claim of self defense, and then hold the individual harmless in civil court should he/she be found not criminally liable.

So the defense is really "self defense" and they are invoking the Castle Doctrine to ensure the state has to prove quilt, rather than the accused needing to prove innocence.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Wisconsin castle doctrine includes the vehicle. Articles on the net imply there was a confrontation, and both parties were in the same parking area. As the accused was trying to leave in his vehicle, the decedent attempted to forcibly enter the vehicle.

Interestingly, the Castle Doctrine was not designed to be "used as a defense." Rather, it was supposed to shift the burden of proof BACK to the state in a claim of self defense, and then hold the individual harmless in civil court should he/she be found not criminally liable.

So the defense is really "self defense" and they are invoking the Castle Doctrine to ensure the state has to prove quilt, rather than the accused needing to prove innocence.

I think that self defense is an implied defense that the state always has to overcome; it is not an "affirmative defense".
 

Franky

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
271
Location
popple butte
A fisherman was killed after a yelling match between a group of people and a fisherman on the other side of the StCroix river. The accused is from Minnesota.The defense lawyer will claim Wisconsin's castle doctrine to justify the shooting. I am flabbergasted! The lawyer is going to claim that the fisherman from the other side of the river posed a threat to his client! Besides even if the fisherman was on the same side, how can the castle doctrine be applied when the accuser was being inflammatory? The lawyer probably means Stand your ground law in public.
Castle doctrine: allows a person certain permissions to protect their home (or “castle”) using force, including deadly force.

Stand your ground:is a law that authorizes a person to protect and defend one's own life and limb against threat or perceived threat. This law states that an individual has no duty to retreat from any place he/she has a lawful right to be and may use any level of force, including lethal, if he/she reasonably believes he/she faces an imminent and immediate threat of serious bodily harm or death; this is as opposed to duty to retreat laws.

There is a difference between the two though both apply on your 'private property'.

We shall see....

http://www.piercecountyherald.com/n...-fisherman-will-claim-self-defense-when-trial

The altercation that occurred resulted in the decedent being stabbed to death and not shot as your above post claims.
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
The altercation that occurred resulted in the decedent being stabbed to death and not shot as your above post claims.

Easy assumption to make consider the OP left out that information while posting on a firearms board about someone claiming defense from a guy on another side of a river.
 

Franky

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
271
Location
popple butte
Easy assumption to make consider the OP left out that information while posting on a firearms board about someone claiming defense from a guy on another side of a river.

My post is true and factual. Do the research and you may be a more informed individual.
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
I missed that you were correcting the OP. My mistake.
 
Last edited:

bmwguy11

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
461
Location
wisconsin
Based on what facts have been presented thus far, looks like the person who was killed was the aggressor.
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
I sent this to the wrong post:

Last year there was a case where the castle doctrine was rejected and sent the apartment dweller to jail. Apparently CD only applies for home defense INSIDE home. This could complicate the western WI case. I understand that castle doctrine can be applied to a vehicle but the issue will be complicated to prove. Could one have driven away and avoided the shooting and killing? It will be interesting to see the case proceed.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wiscons...277770481.html
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
Another thing, if this guy had his gun hidden in his vehicle that MAY complicate the issue. I remember MKEgal had this problem of supposed CC when she was OCing.
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
Another thing, if this guy had his gun hidden in his vehicle that MAY complicate the issue. I remember MKEgal had this problem of supposed CC when she was OCing.

I still contend that 167.31 does no mention whether it is concealed or not, so 941.23 in a vehicle is a moot point if it in a glove box, under a seat, etc, etc, etc, as long as the person is not carrying it on their body.
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
I still contend that 167.31 does no mention whether it is concealed or not, so 941.23 in a vehicle is a moot point if it in a glove box, under a seat, etc, etc, etc, as long as the person is not carrying it on their body.

Didn't MKEgal have it besides her on the passenger seat and still got into trouble for it?
 
Top