58

I would just like to clarify, in addition to the other answers and what Dale M alluded to, one important detail: Unless you are carrying out the death penalty, no one under any circumstances is allowed to kill anyone else. What you are sometimes authorized to do, is to use deadly force. There is an important distinction between the two. When using deadly ...


51

It appears you want to go for a defense strategy based on a self-defense argument. This won't work in many jurisdictions, because self-defense usually doesn't apply when you intentionally caused a situation where you knew you would have to harm someone in self-defense. Similar case: Bob regularly mugs old women in the park by threatening them with a gun. ...


44

As the answer by Greendrake says, if you have a a legal reason, to enter property, you re not a trespasser. Trespassing is generally defined as entering on property against the expressed will of the owner or lawful occupant, without lawful authority. A firefighter is not trespassing when responding to a fire, even if the owner orders the firefighter to ...


36

Applying the Model Penal Code, which is the law in most of the United States: By requesting that A kill B, you are guilty of soliciting murder. By reaching an agreement with A to pay to kill B, you are guilty of criminal conspiracy. Because A attempted to kill B, he is guilty of attempted murder. Because you solicited that attempt, you are an accomplice ...


32

Generally, no. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), which is the law that generally forbids breaking into or damaging computer systems, does not have any exceptions for "hacking back." Congress has considered amending the law on multiple occasions (in 2017 and 2019) to add limited exceptions for so-called "active cyber defense," but ...


27

Laws on self-defense vary greatly from nation to nation. Generally, one cannot hunt down a hypothetical threat but one can defend against an actual threat or even a mistakenly assumed actual threat where no actual threat exists. Alice set it up so that Bob would feel threatened. In many jurisdictions, the self-defense defense for homicide rests on the state ...


16

According to California Penal Code Section 187 (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. Penal Code section 197 and 198: Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases: When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, ...


16

Can an employer be required to provide an escort from office to vehicle? No, at least, not on the theory articulated in the question. I can imagine some circumstances where it is conceivable that there might be a duty arising from some other source, like an OSHA regulation applied to a firing range business, or an express contract with the employee (...


15

Edits added below to outline Florida's laws based on OP's comment Jurisdiction does matter but here is a general answer regarding "stand your ground" laws. States that have so-called "stand your ground laws" each have their own language concerning the law. "Stand your ground laws" are often misunderstood but, generally, just mean that a person has no duty ...


14

Be careful: from the Wikipedia article, it appears that there is a state criminal trial and there will be a federal criminal trial. In addition, there is a federal civil suit which incorporates some stats law claims. The defense in each trial may be different. Have you read the complaint in the civil case? As an example, count 1 alleges, in paragraph 214, ...


13

Engaging in unlawful conduct does not completely preclude a claim of self-defense under Wisconsin law ...but it does raise the bar in some circumstances: Criminal conduct by the defendant removes the presumption that "force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm" when defending against unlawful forced entry to one's own ...


12

This area of law is dependent on affirmative defenses that states may choose to provide. I found two law review articles that present the situations in Georgia and Indiana.1, 2 Georgia Georgia Code 16-3-23 provides a defense for the occupant in this situation. Epstein argues that this statute is somewhat ambiguous but it most likely even applies when the ...


12

The General Rule In practice, the only time when self-defense against a police officer is legal is when you do not know and have no reasonable way that you could have known that the person attacking you is a police officer. (And arguably, a police officer acting in an official capacity in furtherance of his or her duties, rather than in a personal capacity ...


12

If a court authorizes you to enter a property that won't be a trespass. Such an authorization would be meant to be communicated to the property owner before you enter it — so that they allow you to and do not create a situation in which you would need to defend yourself. But if they do create such a situation despite being informed of the court order, then ...


11

In the situation described, the defender is unlikely to get out alive. In most such cases the police will be very proactive in trying to kill the shooter. They have radios and if a "man down" alert occurs, they will be out for blood. If the shooter survives, the odds in court are against him, but not impossible. In one cases the defendant survived and ...


11

Illinois has a "Castle Doctrine" which includes dwellings and other qualified buildings, but not a general "Stand your Ground" doctrine. Normally, to claim self-defense one has to show that they were not able to retreat and had to use force, but in Illinois you do not have a duty to retreat if you are preventing criminal interference ...


10

If you have a reasonable belief you or someone else is in imminent danger you have the right, under California law, to defend yourself with "no more force than was necessary to stop the threat." Which means that yes, in that situation you would be acquitted of murder and assault charges. However, if the knife falls afoul of local weapon laws, you could ...


10

If I remember the case correctly, he didn't make his home look uninhabited (that is nobody is living there) but as if the inhabitants had left (gone shopping etc.) to make it look attractive to burglars. He then waited inside, armed with a gun, with the intent of shooting any burglars that might arrive. He shot the first burglar in the legs, and then ...


10

Self-Defense Law In A Nutshell Self-defense (or defense of others) with deadly force is generally authorized when a reasonable person would believe that the use of death force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily harm to a person (i.e. there aren't non-deadly options that can accomplish this end) and a reasonable person would believe that the use ...


9

I'll use Washington state as my source, but laws will be similar in other states. RCW 9A.76.020 outlaws obstructing a law enforcement officer, which this would be: it is a gross misdemeanor. In using lethal force, you would have committed first degree murder, under RCW 9A.32.030. There is a defense that can be used, per RCW 9A.16.050, that homicide is ...


9

The doctrine of self defence makes it legal to use reasonable force to defend yourself and others against the threat of unlawful and immediate violence. There is no question there is a threat of violence, there is no question it is unlawful, it would be legal if it could be demonstrated the threat was immediate or that a reasonable person would believe it ...


8

Something like this? Darren organised a situation where he knew a fight or flight situation was likely - it is his responsibility to ensure the safety of all involved. This would also include a debrief afterwards to ensure no lasting mental damage to Bob. The setting would need to be safe. If Darren had left a dangerous weapon for Bob to get hold of then it ...


8

defend myself by killing the hit man. What crime(s) have I committed? Generally it would be manslaughter or [1st or 2nd-degree] murder, depending on whether premeditation can be proved. Justifiable homicide is ruled out because the client had the alternative of rescinding the agreement—perhaps subject to agreed constraints on reimbursement—as soon as he ...


7

The general rule is that using force in self-defense is justified if the person using the force reasonably believes it immediately is necessary to prevent the unlawful use of force against themselves or a third party. Deadly force is not generally justified except in response to a reasonable fear of deadly force, or to prevent certain violent crimes (like ...


7

united-states This question does not indicate in what jurisdiction the hypothetical events take place. Since they are hypothetical, I am going to assume the United States. Perhaps other answers will be given for other jurisdictions. I would be interested to read such answers. The Officer's Authority In the hypothetical situation described, it would appear ...


7

The non-cougher committed an unjustified assault, and could be arrested or sued for his actions. The actions were clearly not the minimal level of force needed to prevent continued assault or to effect an arrest (the dude who entered and coughed clearly is guilty of assault). This is regardless of covid. Instead, the other guy decided to beat on the first ...


7

You asked, "could that guy as defendant claim self defense and win?" First let's try to make it clear what is meant by "win". In the Rittenhouse trial, the defendant was charged of the following crimes: First-degree reckless homicide First-degree recklessly endangering safety (x2) First-degree intentional homicide Attempted first-...


6

This actually happened in Germany in 2010: When police raided the home of a member of the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club, the member fired a gun through the closed door before the police could identify themselves. One officer was killed. The killer was sentenced to nine years in prison in 2011, but was acquitted on appeal by the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal ...


6

Some kinds of companies (e.g. freight shipping companies and banks) often do have those policies. The real issue is not whether those policies are permitted, but what the consequences are for breaking them. The fact that a company forbids its employees from exercising a legal right doesn't mean that the employee ceases to have that legal right. It simply ...


6

Absolutely No Unlawful entry into someone's property depends on the circumstances, but on land without barriers, generally you need to make the person aware that coming onto the property is trespassing and violators will be prosecuted and there is differing laws in jurisdictions to what you can do to get trespassing to be acknowledge, but they all require ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible