Do you have an attorney on speed dial?

[chp5]

I carry the number of an attorney in my wallet. He is in the ATL area and does work with our grassroots 2A group, Georgia Carry Organization: GCO

GCO is one of the most effective grassroots 2A groups I can imagine. They ["we" since I'm a member] litigate against unconstitutional laws and ordinances. The attorney I mentioned represents people accused of firarm-related charges.

If you're in GA, I highly recommend you join!

[MichiganShootist]

As many of you know I have been teaching CPL (Concealed Pistol Licensing) classes for a long time.

Here's a couple other thoughts on the topic of this thread.

If pressed for information that you feel uncomfortable about providing... by an LEO (especially if there has been a shooting) ask the LEO if you are under arrest. That changes the entire relationship and they way they will question you. If you are going to be placed under arrest they will have to read you your rights. Whatever the case don't run off at the mouth.

Secondly--- The Lethal Force classes taught by Massad Ayoob are excellent.. and a good investment. Either take his classes or at least buy and STUDY his books. A 4 day class will cost you less than a half day worth of lawyer fees.

Thirdly... Make damn sure the lawyer you pick has EXTENSIVE knowlege of criminal law and gun laws. Just because she or he is great with real estate transactions or at drawing up will doesn't mean they will be of any help in a shooting incident. Mine for example was formerly a prosecuter. A dentist is a doctor but you don't want your dentist do heart surgery on you.

Lastly... if you are put in jail following a self defense type shooting (which is VERY likely).....remember you will be charged and potentially brought to trial in the city or county where the event took place. Your attorney may not be able to defend you and might have to secure a local attorney to help you. Let your lawyer find that local attorney rather than picking one out of the phone book.

[Miranda]

Hi MichiganShootist,

Could you expand a bit on why asking if you are under arrest makes a difference?

miranda

[Litig8r15]

If you intend to use your weapon to defend yourself, then you need to know the laws of the jurisdiction you are in. Meaning, if you travel with your weapon from state to state or possibly even city to city, you need to be aware of any idiosyncrasies of when you are permitted to use deadly force. For example, with Ohio's recent change to adopt a Castle Doctrine, the rules have changed a bit. But surrounding states that recognize the permit are all different and you should not simply assume you can act as you would in Ohio.

As far as any statement to the police, consistent with the applicable laws, you should say something like, "Officer, I was in fear for my life and defended myself against this attacker/robber, etc. (This is where you have to know what your particular jurisdiction requires - for example, do you have a duty to retreat before using deadly force or must you allow a robber to run away rather than shoot or detain them). I will be happy to cooperate with you but I am not going to say anything more until I have had an opportunity to consult with counsel." Better to be detained overnight than to mistakenly say something that will cause more trouble down the road.

If the individual flees, there is nothing wrong with giving a description. In fact, you want him to be caught as soon as possible. What you want to avoid is any description of what occurred because even when justified, you won't be thinking clearly. The adrenaline combined with the impact of being involved in such an incident should not be underestimated.

Eric

[MichiganShootist]

I'm not a lawyer but mine explained it to me this way (and what I was told is consistant with what Massad teaches in his classes too).

If you ask the officer if you are being placed under arrest... He or she then must make up their mind... If they say that you are being placed under arrest.. then they are required to read you your rights.. and then you can very easily "lawyer up" and statements made prior to you being read your rights are generally not admissable to be used against you.

Asking the question (Are you placing me under arrest?) simply shifts the pressure of the interview process to the officer and away from you and potentially brings the "not so casual" questioning to an end.

If they respond that you are not being placed under arrest... then your voluntary comments again are not likely usable against you in court if they later decide to charge you.

That's as well as I can expain it. How about you LEOs in the forum... help us out here.

[Miranda]

ah ok.

push it a little more toward formal. Make the boundries of what is happening clear.

that makes sense.

miranda

[davidwiz]

Secondly--- The Lethal Force classes taught by Massad Ayoob are excellent.. and a good investment. Either take his classes or at least buy and STUDY his books. A 4 day class will cost you less than a half day worth of lawyer fees.

Ayoob is not an attorney and has given atrocious "legal advice" in many of his columns.

Edited January 19, 2009 by davidwiz

[G-ManBart]

I'm not a lawyer but mine explained it to me this way (and what I was told is consistant with what Massad teaches in his classes too).

If you ask the officer if you are being placed under arrest... He or she then must make up their mind... If they say that you are being placed under arrest.. then they are required to read you your rights.. and then you can very easily "lawyer up" and statements made prior to you being read your rights are generally not admissable to be used against you.

Asking the question (Are you placing me under arrest?) simply shifts the pressure of the interview process to the officer and away from you and potentially brings the "not so casual" questioning to an end.

If they respond that you are not being placed under arrest... then your voluntary comments again are not likely usable against you in court if they later decide to charge you.

That's as well as I can expain it. How about you LEOs in the forum... help us out here.

Not exactly....it's fairly complicated and I started to comment on the "arrest" or not part, but decided it was too long to add. I'll try to give the cliff notes from the perspective of how I've been trained to avoid violationg people's rights (and blowing cases against bad guys).

The only time Miranda warnings apply are during a custodial interview. A custodial interview is one in which you are not free to leave whenever you feel like it. If you have been advised that you are under arrest, any questioning from that point forward is a custodial interview and isn't admissable in court if you haven't been read your Miranda warnings. So, they can ask you your name, address etc...without the MW because none of that is going to be used in court. If they haven't read your MW and ask you what happened, none of your reply can be used in court.

The fine point is defining when you are and are not under arrest. If you're simply standing around at the scene, aren't handcuffed and haven't been told you are under arrest, they don't have to read you the MW to ask you questions. They can ask you questions, and anything you say can be used at trial because it's not a custodial interview. Now, if they say "could you wait over by my patrol car for me" it's a grey area....they've asked and you've complied, but is that really custodial or not? The court would have to make a ruling whether you were in custody or not and that will depend on prior case law in the jurisdicition you are in.

Something else to consider. Assume you've been told you are under arrest...whether or not you get handcuffed doesn't matter. If you say anything to them without them asking you a question it isn't a custodial interview and is admissable. They didn't ask you anything, you offered it and it becomes admissable. So, if you hear them talking about what they think happened, and you correct them, it's admissable even if you haven't had your MW read to you.

The idea of being detained also comes into play. If they say "you're not under arrest, but I am detaining you" I'd consider that a custodial situation because you have been told you're not free to leave.

Short, short version....if you're under arrest/detained they have to read your MW for your statements to be used in court. If you're not under arrest/detained they don't have to read you your MW for your statements to be used in court.

I think that points back to the idea of making a very brief statement to the police so that they know you're not the bad guy and provide a description of the bad guy (if necessary). Other than that, tell them you want a lawyer present for any questioning. R,

[Rob Boudrie]

You bet I do and in the event I terminate a perp he will file civil charges aginst the perps family ASAP in an effort to prevent some wrongfull death crap out of them.

If the perp survive he will file a civil sute aginst them for the same reason.

Time for a reality check.

If it's your typical criminal, he will have no attachable assets and as such there is no way you will interest contingency fee counsel in taking your case. Are you really prepared to spend tens of thousands pressing a case with no prospect of collection? You, on the other hand, probably have a home, savings, retirement accounts, a gun collection and insurance that may be relevant in some, but not all, cases. Chances are the other party (or his family) will have no trouble finding an attorney to take his case on a contingency fee basis.

[Bruce]

You bet I do and in the event I terminate a perp he will file civil charges aginst the perps family ASAP in an effort to prevent some wrongfull death crap out of them.

If the perp survive he will file a civil sute aginst them for the same reason.

Time for a reality check.

If it's your typical criminal, he will have no attachable assets and as such there is no way you will interest contingency fee counsel in taking your case. Are you really prepared to spend tens of thousands pressing a case with no prospect of collection? You, on the other hand, probably have a home, savings, retirement accounts, a gun collection and insurance that may be relevant in some, but not all, cases. Chances are the other party (or his family) will have no trouble finding an attorney to take his case on a contingency fee basis.

While doing reality checks...

There is a myth that everyone, no matter how criminal or stupid, can find a lawyer willing to take their case on a contingency fee basis. Trust me, it ain't true.

[Carmoney]

Secondly--- The Lethal Force classes taught by Massad Ayoob are excellent.. and a good investment. Either take his classes or at least buy and STUDY his books. A 4 day class will cost you less than a half day worth of lawyer fees.

Ayoob is not an attorney and has given atrocious "legal advice" in many of his columns.

David, I'm a full-time trial lawyer and partner in a 25-attorney firm. My entire practice is devoted to defending my clients in the civil courts. Our firm has defended law enforcement officers and civilian individuals who have been sued in the aftermath of a shooting incident. Based on my first-hand experience in this field, I have found Massad Ayoob's advice to be consistently solid. That doesn't mean I agree with every single position he takes, of course, but his points are always worthy of consideration. One thing is certain--through his extensive experience as an expert witness, Ayoob knows far more about what happens in the legal aftermath of a self-defense shooting than most attorneys will ever see. As you know, it's not the kind of thing they teach in law school.

[MichiganShootist]

I have found Massad Ayoob's advice to be consistently solid. That doesn't mean I agree with every single position he takes, of course, but his points are always worthy of consideration. One thing is certain--through his extensive experience as an expert witness, Ayoob knows far more about what happens in the legal aftermath of a self-defense shooting than most attorneys will ever see. As you know, it's not the kind of thing they teach in law school

Mike + 1 to your comments.

My attorney who is a trial lawyer who has been at both "tables" many times and graduated from a VERY well known law school-- in my state... told me that "lethal force and related topics MAY have been given a half day of focus in her entire law school experience.

That topic however---is the ONLY focus of Massad ----and my gut reaction would be to trust his advice (in this very narrow area of law) over most members of the bar.

I'm not picking a fight with the legal profession.... just giving a nod to street smarts and experience.

[Rob Boudrie]

I have found Massad Ayoob's advice to be consistently solid.

I respect Dave w/credentials as a lawyer, so I would be very interested in specifics as to what legal advise from Ayoob he considers "less than solid".

There is a myth that everyone, no matter how criminal or stupid, can find a lawyer willing to take their case on a contingency fee basis. Trust me, it ain't true.

Agreed, but the ability of the defendant to cough up damages in settlement or to satisfy a judgment if the case is brought is probably more important than the actual merits of the case when seeking contingency fee counsel.

[MtBob]

Secondly--- The Lethal Force classes taught by Massad Ayoob are excellent.. and a good investment. Either take his classes or at least buy and STUDY his books. A 4 day class will cost you less than a half day worth of lawyer fees.

Ayoob is not an attorney and has given atrocious "legal advice" in many of his columns.

may I ask what advice of his you found atrocious? I haven't read very much of his stuff.

[JKSNIPER]

Assuming this is a shooting situation, I'd suggest the following: When law enforcement shows up you'll need to make it clear you're a good guy/not a threat. If the bad guy ran away or is lying on the ground, you don't want to be standing there with a weapon visible when the police show up...that sort of thing. Tell them the basics like "I was using this ATM and a guy with a gun tried to rob me. I shot/shot at him and he ran down the street in that direction. He was xyz description, about 6' tall wearing a grey jacket and blue jeans". Then shut up and if they ask you questions tell them that you will speak to them with a lawyer present. I guess if they ask a specific question about the description of the bad guy "did his jacket have a hood" you could answer that....they might have a suspect in custody that they're trying to ID down the street etc. If they ask something like "how close did he get to you" then you're back into having a lawyer present. If the bad guy is on the ground, it's a lot easier...."he had a gun and tried robbing me" and then ask for an attorney if they have any questions.

Per the original topic, I keep a card in my wallet that has the emergency contact info for my agent's association so they can get me a lawyer ASAP no matter where I am. For when I'm in the local area I have the numbers of two friendly attorneys who have a history of successfully representing folks in these sorts of cases.

G-man gives some excellent advice for free here guys.

Having an attorney prior to an incident is not proof that you pre-meditated this incident.

You have insurance on your home right?

Does that mean you planned the hurricane?

Planning on what to do in case of a tragedy shows prudence not premeditation.

Call the NRA and get their recommendations for attorney's in the areas you live, work, and travel to.

Do it and keep the #'s in your wallet just in case.

I hope no one here EVER needs to call them but if you do you'll be damm glad you had the #'s.

Also take it from an LEO...I know a WHOLE LOT of people that have talked their way into a jail cell and NONE[/ that have talked their way out of one.

The Sicilians say it best "You can't swallow flies with your mouth closed."

Keep your mouth SHUT.

Offer no opinions, and no remarks like "He deserved it or thats what he gets for trying to rob me!"

No laughing at the jokes you hear the cops tell at the scene.

Prosecutor: "Officer describe in you own words what you obseved the defendant doing at the scene."

Officer: "He was sitting on the curb looking at the deceased and suddenly I saw him burst out laughing."

Imagine the looks the poor guy gets from the jury when the officer says that in court.

Yes your attorney can then elicit WHY you were laughing but the damage is done. The jury has an image in their heads of you laughing at the poor dead young man who "Was just about to turn his life around."

Can't un-ring a bell.

Like Bart says give then basic info and then ask for your attorney and SHUT UP.

And SHUT UP means just that...SHUT UP.

Beyond a basic description of what happened (THe guy held a knife to my throat and said he would kill me ...I drew my firearm and fired it and he ran away.")and pedigree information from you and presentation of your pistol license say NOTHING other than "I would like to call my attorney and have him present prior to answering any questions".

(Note I said "drew my firearm and fired it" not "I shot him" Unless you know with 100% certainty that you shot him and there in unrefutable evidence at the scene that you shot him I would say that I fired my weapon and he ran off rather than I shot him.

You may have (gasp) missed.

There have been gunfights where entire magazines of ammo were exchanged at close range with NO hits. One took place between an officer in the front seat of a car and the suspect in the back seat. I believe 15+ rounds were fired in that one and NO hits. so do NOT say "I shot him" )

Also make no statements because you think they're not admissable.

Remember you are not a lawyer...don't get legal advice from Law and Order University graduates.

Thats why you have attorney's phone #s .......remember?

There is such a thing as "Spontaneous utterance"

In other words if you suddenly say something without them asking you about it it is admissable.

Often you'll have officers discuss things within the hearing of the suspect hoping he will suddenly get upset and say "You've got it all wrong! Thats not what happened! This is what happened....."

BAD move.

Also silence is another thing officers will use. I keep quiet during the ride to the station I'd bet 100$ most suspects will NOT keep quiet for the entire ride.

Most say SOMETHING during the ride to you..they can't help themselves.

The best way to think is not what is /is not admissable..assume that EVERYTHING is admissable and you'll be more inclined to keep your mouth shut.

Best advice is :

#1. Be prepared ahead of time. Have the lawyers phone #'s make sure they're current.

#2. Ask for an attorney and KEEP asking from EVERY cop you speak to.

#3. Say ONLY what is necessary to say. Bare details and hand over your I.D. and license for your pistol and then....

#4. SHUT UP.

#5 WHen calling your attorney make certain you are alone in the room and even if you're alone only say what is necessary over the phone. "I need you to come to the ___ pct because I'm underarrest and they're charging me with ______.

NOT "I shot a guy and I need a lawyer."

JK

Edited February 4, 2009 by JKSNIPER