Recent shooting justified?


A knife and a freshly sharpened pencil, while both being sharp objects, are not the same thing.
Sure they are. I can route you with either in a second. We teach a tactical pen class. You can do tremendous damage with a pen or pencil.


New member
As much as I agree with shooting the thug, it is against the law to shoot someone walking away from you. Since the suspect was walking away he no longer presented an immediate threat to the victoms life or anyone elses. Therefore shoorting the suspect in the back is nothing short of a desire to pay thousands in legal defense fees.


New member
Yep, most likely he will be charged. If I was on the jury, he walks. Just because he turns his back doesnt mean I am not still in fear of my life. I know...not PC and I most likely will never be accused of it.


New member
Yep, most likely he will be charged. If I was on the jury, he walks. Just because he turns his back doesnt mean I am not still in fear of my life. I know...not PC and I most likely will never be accused of it.

Myself today I worry more about how our Tulsa County D.A. Tim Harris handles any case that involves a firearm. Since my arrest and 11 Months being dragged through our Oklahoma justice system, ending in a full jury trial and I feel very lucky the D.A.s people did not win their case against me.
I feel I might try anything to keep from having to deal with Tim Harris and his anti-firearm policies.
Time and time again when the shooting is clear that someone was in fear of death or defending their family in their own home, they end up having to fight the Tulsa County D.A. and having to get costly legal help.
It's not justice the Tulsa County D.A. Tim Harris wants it's as much money they can get by getting a case against you won.
I was just really lucky to get a good honest jury and a really good fair Judge in Judge Cliford Smith, or today I would be sitting in prison.


New member
This occurred yesterday at a Walmart in Logan WV. A male approached another subject with a sharp object in his hand demanding his money, subject reportedly had the guy by the neck and made several threats to cut the guys throat. The guy handed over his wallet and the subject was walking away. Guy who has a WV CDP permit pulls his gun and shoots killing subject. Guy is arrested for murder and law enforcement is leaving it up to the prosecutors to figure it out.

Granted not many of us are lawyers and I'm not very familiar with WV laws. But what is your opinion justified or not?

Link Removed

NOT justified. The BG was leaving, the danger was leaving. The shooting was vengence or retribution. Pull your gun, get on the cell phone to the police, tell them what's going on, give a VERY good description of YOURSELF (so the itchy finger cop doesn't shoot you) and follow the BG while giving the police dispatch constant position updates.


New member
Most states under castle doctrine state that if person walks away the threat is over. So it's not justified he could have defended himself when he saw the shiny object or shot during the altercation never when the suspect leaves. Personally a wallet can be your life with identity theft yet it's a different threat there it's not physical


New member
Like others have said here, the victims life was no longer in danger in that the "perp" was walking away. Sorry, sounds like murder to me no matter how angry the CHP holder may have been.


I'm going to go against the majority of the folks so far here. I think it is absolutely completely justified. He had stolen the guy's wallet and threatened to kill him with the apparent tools to do so.

Having said that, I feel absolutely sure that in most States (Texas probably being an exception) it was totally illegal and will likely end with a conviction for murder barring jury nullification.


New member
If the BG was leaving he was no longer a threat! Thats my opinion anyway. At that point the victim has the opportunity to seek help.


Also shooting someone in the back is in no way justifiable homicide. IMHO!!!

It depends totally on the circumstances. There are lot's of justifiable shootings where the BG is shot in the back.


New member
bg fleeing

I read once, (don't no what state it was), that armed robery is still in progress if he is leaving with your property. In that case the gg shot him in the back and no charges were filed.


New member
I would appreciate knowing where the imminent danger is once the BG is away from and walking away from the victim. It is not there and the BG has now been shot in the back---depending on state law and jury--who knows. In SC, if this occurred at night (only at night), you can effect a citizens arrest and, according to the law, use any means at your disposal including death, to prevent the BG from evading your arrest. Put simply, if this occurred at a Walmart in SC at night, you can shoot him in the back and kill him, once you have told him to stand there and wait for police.


I may be totally wrong here but here is my thought. If you shoot the BG in the back and he winds up dying I believe that you may have a very difficult time explaining to a jury how you were in fear of serious bodily injury or death. That is the ONLY circumstance in which SC CWP holders are allowed by law to use deadly force. On the other hand, if you are a good shot, and you should be, then you could shoot the BG in the leg and reduce is level of mobility and then have some folks sit on him, disarm him and wait on the police to arrive. While you are taking him down and he resists arrest and tries to use deadly force on you then you are again in fear of serious bodily injury and or death and would be justified in using deadly force to defend yourself. Any way you look at this there are a lot of variables and I would highly recommend that you consider a lot of things before you shoot someone in the back.

Rich M

New member
Well folks, they dismissed the charges and he is free. Looks like the W.Va Courts sees it as justified.

UPDATE 9/20/11 @ 6:30 p.m.
LOGAN, W.Va. (WSAZ) -- Jesus Canul, better known as Jesse, was released from home confinement Tuesday after a murder charge against him was dismissed.

Personally, its not justified to shoot someone in the back if they are no longer a threat. BUT... moron had what was comming to him. He shoulda stayed home and he would still be alive instead of robing someone.


New member
With all respect folks, I think we have gotten off topic here. The goal was to address if this was a justified shooting or not. I think we all agree that 1. We are not lawyers, and that our opinions are just that. 2. It is of the utmost importance to know the laws concerning justified use of lethal force in the jurisdiction you are in, as can be clearly indicated from the responses to the thread. 3. That, in general (if not always), use of lethal force is to be limited to the moments when you have a reasonable fear for your life being taken by an attacker. 4. That even though we have no doubt who the bad guy is and won't miss him, that this qualifies as an unjust shooting and underscores the reasons we all have to ensure that we know what we're doing and hold ourselves to such a high standard.

I think we've covered just about everything here. The facts are the facts, and this is not a big game of "what if" or "create a scenario" for discussion. We can create another thread for that.

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Latest member