Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: King County Prosecutor's Office - Self Defense friendly

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    "Thank you for contacting the King County Prosecutor's Office regarding the defense of your home from a burglar and the justifiable homicide statute. We appreciate hearing from you on this important topic.
    Washington State lawclearly gives a homeowner the right to use all necessary force to repel the invasion of their home.Our office has not charged a homeowner for using force against a burglarin the past.
    However, every case must be reviewed on its own facts for whether the use of force was reasonable and necessary before we apply the justifiable homicide statute. We oftenencounter cases where the level offorce used in response to the level of threat posed is unreasonable and unnecessary. Wewould review every use of force caseindependently.
    I hope this information has been helpful.
    Sincerely,
    Ian Goodhew
    King County Prosecutor's Office"

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Richland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    Is it just me or does he sound a lot like a politician? I don't see the justifiable homicide statue that you requested from him.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    Oh, I apologize. I should have included my original email with the post. Basically, I asked him how much of a "gray area" the justifiable homicide statue is, and asked if a home owner would have any criminal repercussions to worry about in the use of lethal force on an invader.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Richland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    Reading it again with that in mind, it makes a lot more sense. Well in that case, I'm glad they have not charged a homeowner in those circumstances. Try not to be the first.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    Well I would hope I wouldn't have to be in that position to make that decision.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Hmmmm I thought that response sounded familiar.

    Sixth post from the bottom.

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/28311-3.html
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    Oh wow, didn't even see that. I PMed that to him a long time ago when he was asking about it, although it certainly wasn't titled "Mr Bader".

    I haven't seen his postings lately, but I'd like to make it clear that the email was NOT addressed to him. That was posted directly after I PMed him.

  8. #8
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463

    Post imported post

    RCW 9A.16.050Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.
    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

    (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.


    The RCW seems pretty clear and this would cover if you are in a tent camping, cabin, staying in a motor home, in a hotel and so on.

    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    BigDave wrote:
    RCW 9A.16.050Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.
    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

    (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.


    The RCW seems pretty clear and this would cover if you are in a tent camping, cabin, staying in a motor home, in a hotel and so on.
    It says "Commit a felony". A felony isn't necessarily a violent crime. So if you see a major drug deal going down, and you use lethal force, you can get off on justifiable homicide? Might sound like a stupid question, but it's what the RCW says. How exactly is that interpreted?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Snohomish County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    117

    Post imported post


    Hoplophobia is a social disease.

  11. #11
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463

    Post imported post

    Aaron1124 wrote:
    BigDave wrote:
    RCW 9A.16.050Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.
    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

    (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.


    The RCW seems pretty clear and this would cover if you are in a tent camping, cabin, staying in a motor home, in a hotel and so on.
    It says "Commit a felony". A felony isn't necessarily a violent crime. So if you see a major drug deal going down, and you use lethal force, you can get off on justifiable homicide? Might sound like a stupid question, but it's what the RCW says. How exactly is that interpreted?
    First the answer to your question "So if you see a major drug deal going down, and you use lethal force, you can get off on justifiable homicide?" as I see and read the RCW is NO

    You must keep the sentence intact and not piece it up as you have with "Commit a Felony" instead of how it reads.

    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer,

    in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.

    Hopefully this helps.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    Keyword there is "Upon". Gotcha.

  13. #13
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463

    Post imported post

    Aaron1124 wrote:
    Keyword there is "Upon". Gotcha.
    Well partially.

    RCW 9A.16.050Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.
    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

    (2)
    In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer,

    This reads to me as in the act to commit a felony upon you.



    in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.


    This reads to me, is where every you are legally able to reside from walking down the street to your motor home, apartment, hotel etc and your place of abode.

    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    [img]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/AARONA%7E1/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot.png[/img]



  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    Posts
    332

    Post imported post

    So, I have to pose this hypothetical: If I see a dealer trying to sell my kid drugs (committing a felony "upon" my child) is it justifiable to
    thoroughly neutralize this scum-sucking threat? Or is it just tremendously and temporarily satisfying?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    3/325 wrote:
    So, I have to pose this hypothetical: If I see a dealer trying to sell my kid drugs (committing a felony "upon" my child) is it justifiable to
    thoroughly neutralize this scum-sucking threat? Or is it just tremendously and temporarily satisfying?
    I am no expert on the topic, but in theory, it looks like it would fall under the statute. Of course, it would be up to the prosecutor to bring up charges and the judge or jury to find you guilty. No idea how they would view that.

  17. #17
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463

    Post imported post

    This is something for you should become familiar with.

    Your post is to vague to determine an appropriate action.

    [line]
    RCW 9A.16.050Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.
    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

    (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.

    [line]
    Part IV. Defenses
    WPIC CHAPTER 16. Justifiable Homicide

    WPIC 16.05 Necessary—Definition

    Necessary means that, under the circumstances as they reasonably appeared to the actor at the time, (1) no reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist and (2) the amount of force used was reasonable to effect the lawful purpose intended. NOTE ON USE

    Use this instruction when the word “necessary” is used in instructions relating to defenses in WPIC Chapters 16 and 17.

    [line]
    Part IV. Defenses
    WPIC CHAPTER 17. Lawful Force—Charges Other Than Homicide


    WPIC 17.02 Lawful Force—Defense of Self, Others, Property

    It is a defense to a charge of __________ that the force [used][attempted][offered to be used] was lawful as defined in this instruction. [The [use of][attempt to use][offer to use] force upon or toward the person of another is lawful when [used][attempted][offered] [by a person who reasonably believes that [he][she] is about to be injured] [by someone lawfully aiding a person who [he][she] reasonably believes is about to be injured] in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against the person, and when the force is not more than is necessary.] [The [use of][attempt to use][offer to use] force upon or toward the person of another is lawful when [used][attempted][offered] in preventing or attempting to prevent a malicious trespass or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in that person's possession, and when the force is not more than is necessary.] The person [using][or][offering to use] the force may employ such force and means as a reasonably prudent person would use under the same or similar conditions as they appeared to the person, taking into consideration all of the facts and circumstances known to the person at the time of [and prior to] the incident. The [State][City][County] has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the force [used][attempted][offered to be used] by the defendant was not lawful. If you find that the [State][City][County] has not proved the absence of this defense beyond a reasonable doubt, it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty [as to this charge]. NOTE ON USE

    Use this instruction in any case in which this defense is an issue supported by the evidence. Use bracketed material as applicable. Use this instruction for any charge other than homicide or attempted homicide. If homicide is involved, use WPIC 16.02, Justifiable Homicide—Defense of Self and Others. With this instruction, use WPIC 16.05, Necessary—Definition. Also use, as applicable, WPIC 2.13, Malice—Maliciously—Definition. If there is an issue whether the defendant was the aggressor, use WPIC 16.04, Aggressor—Defense of Self, or WPIC 16.04.01, Aggressor—Defense of Others.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  18. #18
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    3/325 wrote:
    So, I have to pose this hypothetical: If I see a dealer trying to sell my kid drugs (committing a felony "upon" my child) is it justifiable to
    thoroughly neutralize this scum-sucking threat? Or is it just tremendously and temporarily satisfying?
    I think before you start shooting drug dealers you need have a long talk with your kids.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    Forgot to add that my primary reason to make this thread was to show that if you rightfully shoot an intruder, and you live in King County, chances are, you won't need to make any sort of case to prove your innocence to a jury.

  20. #20
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    Now if you only can get King County's Sheriff to be self defense freindly.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tacoma, WA, ,
    Posts
    886

    Post imported post

    3/325 wrote:
    So, I have to pose this hypothetical: If I see a dealer trying to sell my kid drugs (committing a felony "upon" my child) is it justifiable to
    thoroughly neutralize this scum-sucking threat? Or is it just tremendously and temporarily satisfying?
    So, if your child says "no, thanks" to the drugs, and that was that, are they the 'victim of a felony drug deal?' Drug deals either happen or they do not. There are perpetrators (buyer and distributor), but if your child was only offered to be the buyer and declined, they are not the 'victim' of anything. Sorry to burst your bubble. It'd just be 'tremendously and temporarily satisfying.'

  22. #22
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    We'd have to shoot anyone who sells alcohol or tobacco too. :shock:


    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •