Somebody did the right thing in shooting the bad guy. Now they will have to defend themselves in court.
I just don't believe some of the things I hear anymore.
No good deed goes unpunished.
(c) A person is justified in using reasonable force against any other 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.
The U.S. Supreme Court has also held that the right against double jeopardy precludes only subsequent criminal proceedings. It does not preclude ordinary civil or administrative proceedings against a person who already has been prosecuted for the same act or omission. Nor is prosecution barred by double jeopardy if it is preceded by a final civil or administrative determination on the same issue.
That just doesn't seem right at all. You can perform a completely legal act, and even save someone's life, and still get reamed for it. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
So, I assume there is a difference between LEGAL jeopardy and CIVIL jeopardy?
Did some quick googling:
double jeopardy legal definition of double jeopardy. double jeopardy synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.
That just doesn't seem right at all. You can perform a completely legal act, and even save someone's life, and still get reamed for it. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
We have any good samaritan laws that this could help defend?
So, I assume there is a difference between LEGAL jeopardy and CIVIL jeopardy?...
...That just doesn't seem right at all. You can perform a completely legal act, and even save someone's life, and still get reamed for it. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
It is really sad, but the robber's mother is suing Kroger because he had a reasonable expectation of not being shot because Kroger has a no firearms policy in their store. Here's a direct quote from the lawsuit that was filed:
"By failing to supervise its employees, enforce its own policies, and failing to properly train its employees, Kroger breached its duty of care to Atkinson."....