1911Forum banner

Wrongful conviction

2K views 14 replies 15 participants last post by  RickB 
#1 · (Edited)
#4 ·
I have said this several times lately and will continue to say it. Just because we carry firearms does not relieve us of the burden for acting responsible.

A 911 call telling the dispatcher that he was being surrounded and afraid for his life would have gone a long way towards a legal defense.

As suggested above not going to a rally like that would have been even better. I carry a firearm off duty everywhere I go. I however do not walk the alleys and dark neighborhoods in disadvantaged housing projects when not working. It is a very foreseeable event that if I did I would put myself in the position to have to use a weapon. Why do that when my brothers an sisters in uniform are on duty and that is their role?


The old saying of "just because you can does not mean you should " applies here in my humble opinion.
 
#5 ·
That guy should have tucked tail and ran while calling 911
 
#6 · (Edited)
Once isolated and surrounded, it was a hopeless, no-win situation.

A choice between being beaten to a pulp and being criminally charged.

That's the way the Dems want things to be.:(:(:(

Not particularly wise for this gentleman to have placed himself in such a situation. I agree with this sentiment.

But even so, such an error in judgement (IMHO), shouldn't have resulted in the gentleman having no choices other than being beaten, perhaps fatally, and being charged as he was.

I doubt that calling 911 while surrounded by a hostile crowd was an option. I wasn't there, but I doubt that the crowd would have stood by passively, allowing for the cellphone dialing and discussion time that would have been inevitable with such a call. I suspect the cellphone would have been immediately and forcefully taken out of his hand.
 
#9 ·
I doubt that calling 911 while surrounded by a hostile crowd was an option. I wasn't there, but I doubt that the crowd would have stood by passively, allowing for the cellphone dialing and discussion time that would have been inevitable with such a call. I suspect the cellphone would have been immediately and forcefully taken out of his hand.
That's when the fight would have been on and shots probably fired.
 
#7 ·
Man wrongfully convicted for self defense....

I don't know the actual events or evidence, so I can not judge the outcome.

However, if he was wrongfully convicted, he has the right to appeal the conviction, and to keep appealing to higher courts. The Civil Liberties union might help with the case....
 
#15 ·
The Bill of Rights is displayed prominently at ACLU's HQ, and they omitted the 2nd Amendment.
Maybe they've had a change of heart in the last 20-30 years, but traditionally they have not been supportive.
 
#10 ·
So a guy who is threatened by a mob of people, clearly intending to do physical harm to him shouldn't have drawn hoss weapon to defend himself? What planet do you guys live on? Some of you must not know what surrounded means, it means encircled, no escape, all sides and exits closed off. Just how was he supposed to runaway?

It was his job to be there.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 
#11 ·
I agree but you shouldn't put yourself in that situation. People,places and things.
 
#12 ·
I applaud people that push the limits of our society's encroachments to our liberties. They risk their liberties for the rest of us.

Was it a good idea for Strickland to be there? Should he have been armed? Should he have drawn his weapon? Hell yes!
 
#13 · (Edited)
I have no issue him going to the rally armed...And personally, I have no issue he pulling his gun in SD. But, legally, the better thing for him to do would be to flee. Looks like he could have gotten away. And if they pursued him his case for pulling the gun would have been stronger...That said, I think he got screwed by the police when he was charged. And in our society, every SD decision has to be thought of in a legal (fortunately) (but also) (unfortunately) political context.
 
#14 ·
But, legally, the better thing for him to do would be to flee. Looks like he could have gotten away. .

duty to retreat on the street is a legal requirement in Ohio before lethal force .
(Castle doctrine applies in home and auto)

In at least one of the pics, there appears room to retreat, but we don't know/can't see what's outside of the frame

If he did indeed have room to bugout, he should of.
( this contingent on duty to retreat being law in his state)

The question to me becomes, did he brandish to assert his right to film/document and not be intimidated by mob rule?

Or was he backing up in an effort to bugout while covering his retreat with drawn pistol?


If I was The King and had to judge....

If the latter, he's free 'n clear
If the former, a very stern slap on the wrist would suffice


.L.T.A.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top