Castle law

[tnek]

I have to relate a story I was told last nite.

I guy I know as in my wife works around this fellows wife and I have been to parties over the years. Decent law abiding guy.

Story goes,,,

He was at the wallyworld and someone was parked in the middle of an aisle as in waiting for a parking place or something. The guy in question goes around the driver blocking the aisle.
He drives around the next row.
Allegedly the driver who was waiting took offense for whatever reason.
The driver who was waiting then decided he was going to follow the guy I know and start a beef. He pulled up and either blocked in or parked next to the guy who was just trying to find a spot to park.

The aggressive driver then got out of his car and aproached the friend and threatened him and informed him that he was going to beat his rear.

Now the guy who was just going around the guy blocking the aisle produced his legally owned and carried pistol and told the fellow he needed to get back into his car and drop it.

Im told the guy who had to actually point his pistol just left the lot to diffuse the stiuation.

He is in the process of moving and the cops showed up in force at the first house on a farm and did a hut hut no knock thing and then after the donuts were gone they figured out he lived at the new house.
They pulled the same thing at the house he moved to.
He was arrested,, thank god they didnt shoot the dogs for fun,,,and he bailed out.

Now he is dealing with the after affects.

I thought the Castle Doctrine in Indiana protected from that??

My question is if they ran his plate from the guy who started it all calling the cops why didnt they phone the citizen who has never been in trouble first to try to call him in to deal with it??

I hope the wally world cam tape exhonerates him but this is fubar.

What good is the castle doctrine if you use a weapon to stop an assult ant the guy who wanted to attack you calls the cops and cries wolf????

This was in Lafayette BTW and I am trying to verify the story as told.

If I can find out more I will post and I didnt see a news story about this.

 

[IndyMonkey]

Guilty until proven innocent.

 

[Archbishop]

My opinion is it doesn't sound serious enough to produce weapon. You're in your car just roll up the window and drive away, or when cornered just call the police. When the guy starts physically trying to enter your car shoot him dead.
Now assuming that it really was serious enough to pull your gun, he was there I wasn't, then it's serious enough to also call the police as you're getting out of dodge. You just pulled a weapon, you don't think the other person will call and say how they were minding their own business when some crazy guy pulled a gun?

 

[tnek]

My opinion is it doesn't sound serious enough to produce weapon. You're in your car just roll up the window and drive away, or when cornered just call the police. When the guy starts physically trying to enter your car shoot him dead.
Now assuming that it really was serious enough to pull your gun, he was there I wasn't, then it's serious enough to also call the police as you're getting out of dodge. You just pulled a weapon, you don't think the other person will call and say how they were minding their own business when some crazy guy pulled a gun?

I wasnt there but my point is that I thought the Castle Law ment you dont have to run but can stand your ground if forced. I dont have any real facts yet but from what I was told its a perfect example of what its ment to do.
Plus the fact the cops pulled a swat crp thing on him puts it over the line.

I mean if at my age of close to 50 if some guy who is in his prime and twice my size starts threatening me its a no brainer that the situation gets equalized.

 

[Manan]

Was your friend (or a reasonable man) in fear of his life or great bodily harm? If not, he committed a crime called "assault with a firearm".

 

[tnek]

Was your friend (or a reasonable man) in fear of his life or great bodily harm? If not he committed a crime called "assault with a firearm".

Then what did the Castle law do?? I was under the impression it ment if threatened you can stand your ground.
Im looking for clarafication. And the facts of what he did.

 

[tnek]

Was your friend (or a reasonable man) in fear of his life or great bodily harm? If not he committed a crime called "assault with a firearm".

I gotta ask is being threatened by someone and they come at you with intent to fight you, beat you or for all you know kill you come under the great bodily harm thing??? I just dont know how it works. I really dont want to have to find out either.

 

[Archbishop]

I wasnt there but my point is that I thought the Castle Law ment you dont have to run but can stand your ground if forced. I dont have any real facts yet but from what I was told its a perfect example of what its ment to do.
Plus the fact the cops pulled a swat crp thing on him puts it over the line.

I mean if at my age of close to 50 if some guy who is in his prime and twice my size starts threatening me its a no brainer that the situation gets equalized.

you're right on the stand your ground bit. But think about if it was your house, which in this case is how the how the law loosely sees it, Your in your house when some crazy comes up on your lawn threatening bodily injury. Even if disparity of force is obvious,your 50 he's 20s body builder, your inside and he's not. You call the police and wait. As long as he not actively trying to get into your house or cause you immediate danger you wait for the police. (Ie, shooting at your house or trying to set it on fire.)
In the above case it's hard to justify going outside waving your gun around.
What isn't clear from your description is your friends life being in immediate danger, and that's part of what's required before you bring a weapon into play. He's in the car, crazy is outside the car yelling and screaming. OK, let him yell until he's hoarse, or until the cops show up. When he produces a weapon to break the glass or otherwise looks like he's going to immediately enter the car then you have risk of immediate danger which helps justify pulling the gun.
And as stated before if you pull a gun, then pull the cell phone to just as soon as you can safely.

 

[Archbishop]

I gotta ask is being threatened by someone and they come at you with intent to fight you, beat you or for all you know kill you come under the great bodily harm thing??? I just dont know how it works. I really dont want to have to find out either.

Yes it could. If he was in his car then he should have stayed in his car. If he was already out then it could have gone a number of different ways. Hard to arm chair quarterback that.
That being said he needs to prove three things:
1. The BG has the desire to inflict grave injury or death. (Yelling I'm gonna kick your @$$ or whatever.)
2. The BG has the ability to inflict grave injury or death. A crippled 90 year old yelling what's going to do doesn't carry as much weight as a young able bodied man. This is disparity of force and is quite vague and technical all at the same time. Two guys being equal facing off and ones pulls a gun to protect himself is going to have a hard time in court. A person against 2-3 BG will have an easier time. in court. There many different variables here. Is the victim male or female? Old or young? Bad guy have a weapon? More than one Bad guy/ You get the idea.
3. The final thing that must be shown is immediate risk of grave injury or death. A person calling you the phone telling you that when he comes to town he's going to kill you doesn't qualify. A person yelling across a parking lot probably doesn't qualify. (Unless they have a gun.) A person standing reasonably close to you (Generally speaking 20 feet or closer.) threatening you does qualify. If you're in car though, and they are not actively trying to get in and they don't have a weapon to instantly effect you through the glass, (Think gun.) then you'll a hard time proving that a person yelling at you through the window was a real threat.

It gets tossed around quite a bit, but just saying, " I was in fear for my life." is not necessarily justified reason enough to pull a weapon. Proving the three points above must also be met. Two identical situations before two different juries might get a different verdict at the end of the day.

 

[tnek]

Yes it could. If he was in his car then he should have stayed in his car. If he was already out then it could have gone a number of different ways. Hard to arm chair quarterback that.
That being said he needs to prove three things:
1. The BG has the desire to inflict grave injury or death. (Yelling I'm gonna kick your @$$ or whatever.)
2. The BG has the ability to inflict grave injury or death. A crippled 90 year old yelling what's going to do doesn't carry as much weight as a young able bodied man. This is disparity of force and is quite vague and technical all at the same time. Two guys being equal facing off and ones pulls a gun to protect himself is going to have a hard time in court. A person against 2-3 BG will have an easier time. in court. There many different variables here. Is the victim male or female? Old or young? Bad guy have a weapon? More than one Bad guy/ You get the idea.
3. The final thing that must be shown is immediate risk of grave injury or death. A person calling you the phone telling you that when he comes to town he's going to kill you doesn't qualify. A person yelling across a parking lot probably doesn't qualify. (Unless they have a gun.) A person standing reasonably close to you (Generally speaking 20 feet or closer.) threatening you does qualify. If you're in car though, and they are not actively trying to get in and they don't have a weapon to instantly effect you through the glass, (Think gun.) then you'll a hard time proving that a person yelling at you through the window was a real threat.

It gets tossed around quite a bit, but just saying, " I was in fear for my life." is not necessarily justified reason enough to pull a weapon. Proving the three points above must also be met. Two identical situations before two different juries might get a different verdict at the end of the day.

Like I said I am trying to get all the info but it sounds like #1 was pretty much a given. #2 I dont know how big or bad the BG was but want to find out more. As far as #3 I was told the guy who pulled his sidearm was still seated in his car. I dont know if he was blocked in or not for sure.
Under duress I know these things get foggy and all you see is who ever is in front of you, I know the guy well enough that he is/was a part time farmer and pretty decent guy.

I have an email sent for info and I will be following this as best I can.

 

[Manan]

That's where the lawyers get to do the Monday morning quarterbacking here. They will or maybe a jury will make a judgment about what was reasonable. Hence the "reasonable man" threshold.

I would not allow a man on foot the ability to strike me if I were in a vehicle. I give it the gas and leave. Dial 911 and let the cops do their job. If he can get to me physically and I am in fear of my life or great bodily harm, then I am allowed to defend myself to ANY level at my discretion, including deadly force. No "Reasonable Man" threshold required on the action part, just the perceived threat level part.

 

[evansvillethompsongunner]

LAWYER THE EFF UP.

LIKE, YESTERDAY.

 

[Astrocreep]

LAWYER THE EFF UP.

LIKE, YESTERDAY.

^^^Absolutely^^^

NEVER EVER talk to the police without a lawyer present!

In the case of the OP, I believe (not having actually been there mind you) that pulling his sidearm was hasty and probably not necessary to diffuse the situation.
If someone blocked me in while in a parking lot and aggressively approached my vehicle, I would definitely be on the phone to 911 and reporting his sorry behind before taking any defensive action.
I'm sure plenty of witnesses would be available...
NO WAY would I get out, unless I saw him pull a weapon of his own, or threaten the life of some innocent bystander.

Drive away, call the cops.



There is no 'Castle Law' by name in Indiana, but Gov. Daniels signed House Enrolled Act 1028 into law in 2006:
Enrolled Act, House Bill 1028

It basically amends the law to ensure that there is no 'duty to retreat' from violence or the threat of violence before using force (including lethal force) to defend yourself or others.

Amazing that some places actually require you to try and run away if someone is attacking you.
How monumentally stupid can you be?


Something to remember about defensive use of your firearm:
ALWAYS be the first one on the phone to 911 reporting the incident and stating that you have been involved in a defensive shooting or defensive situation (like the OP). Lawyer Up.
Bad guys (and aggressive jerks like in the OP) have been known to report 'a crazy guy with a gun' type garbage just to mess with their victims and cause chaos.
I'd wager that's what happened to the poor guy in the OP's story.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've heard that Law Enforcement generally treats the first caller as the victim and any others as potential suspects...

 

[Pointman]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've heard that Law Enforcement generally treats the first caller as the victim and any others as potential suspects...

Always be the first one to call it in even if you feel the situation has been diffused.

 

[Archbishop]

That's where the lawyers get to do the Monday morning quarterbacking here. They will or maybe a jury will make a judgment about what was reasonable. Hence the "reasonable man" threshold.

I would not allow a man on foot the ability to strike me if I were in a vehicle. I give it the gas and leave. Dial 911 and let the cops do their job. If he can get to me physically and I am in fear of my life or great bodily harm, then I am allowed to defend myself to ANY level at my discretion, including deadly force. No "Reasonable Man" threshold required on the action part, just the perceived threat level part.

You said what I was trying to say more conisely sp?

 

[infidel]

Always be the first one to call it in even if you feel the situation has been diffused.

Not me. I'm not going to get cops involved if I don't have to. If you call the cops telling them you just pulled a gun on someone, they will show up, and you will be pressured to give a statement, detained, or arrested. If I haven't commited a crime, and nobody is in danger, I'm generally not going to call the cops. I would take the chances of the aggresor I stopped calling the cops on me over inviting the cops into my life myself in most instances.

Don't talk to cops.

 

[Jay]

Information Maintained by the Office of Code Revision Indiana Legislative Services Agency
03/02/2009 10:00:28 AM EST
IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:

(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;

if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.

(b) A person:

(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;

if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.

(c) With respect to property other than a dwelling, curtilage, or an occupied motor vehicle, a person is justified in using reasonable force against another person if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other person's trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect. However, a person:

(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;

only if that force is justified under subsection (a).

 

[tnek]

Not me. I'm not going to get cops involved if I don't have to. If you call the cops telling them you just pulled a gun on someone, they will show up, and you will be pressured to give a statement, detained, or arrested. If I haven't commited a crime, and nobody is in danger, I'm generally not going to call the cops. I would take the chances of the aggresor I stopped calling the cops on me over inviting the cops into my life myself in most instances.

Don't talk to cops.

Sadly Im in agreement on this. I have met a few LEOs that are OK but overall I dont want to expose myself to the legal system cause I dont trust the system.

 

[E5RANGER375]

you're right on the stand your ground bit. But think about if it was your house, which in this case is how the how the law loosely sees it, Your in your house when some crazy comes up on your lawn threatening bodily injury. Even if disparity of force is obvious,your 50 he's 20s body builder, your inside and he's not. You call the police and wait. As long as he not actively trying to get into your house or cause you immediate danger you wait for the police. (Ie, shooting at your house or trying to set it on fire.)
In the above case it's hard to justify going outside waving your gun around.
What isn't clear from your description is your friends life being in immediate danger, and that's part of what's required before you bring a weapon into play. He's in the car, crazy is outside the car yelling and screaming. OK, let him yell until he's hoarse, or until the cops show up. When he produces a weapon to break the glass or otherwise looks like he's going to immediately enter the car then you have risk of immediate danger which helps justify pulling the gun.
And as stated before if you pull a gun, then pull the cell phone to just as soon as you can safely.

I agree with this ^^^^^

but if i pull it the time for warning is over. the attacker is going to die that night 4 sure

 

[singlestacksig]

which laff. walmart.. & how long ago did this happen?