MichDeac25
Well-known member
Good clarification. I just wanted to point out that "homicide" does have a legal definition in NY (I would assume most states are similar). The NY State Statutes also address the concept of a "justifiable homicide."
Of course, the text of the laws is only part of the equation. One person can read these laws and decide he is guilty of a crime and another person could decide he is not guilty. That's why we have a justice system with courts, judges, lawyers, juries, etc. But I do think Jones will be charged with something more serious than assault, i.e., one of the crimes listed under "homicide."
§ 35.05 Justification; generally.
Unless otherwise limited by the ensuing provisions of this article
defining justifiable use of physical force, conduct which would
otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when:
1. Such conduct is required or authorized by law or by a judicial
decree, or is performed by a public servant in the reasonable exercise
of his official powers, duties or functions; or
2. Such conduct is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an
imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a
situation occasioned or developed through no fault of the actor, and
which is of such gravity that, according to ordinary standards of
intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding such
injury clearly outweigh the desirability of avoiding the injury sought
to be prevented by the statute defining the offense in issue. The
necessity and justifiability of such conduct may not rest upon
considerations pertaining only to the morality and advisability of the
statute, either in its general application or with respect to its
application to a particular class of cases arising thereunder. Whenever
evidence relating to the defense of justification under this subdivision
is offered by the defendant, the court shall rule as a matter of law
whether the claimed facts and circumstances would, if established,
constitute a defense.
35.10 Justification; use of physical force generally.
The use of physical force upon another person which would otherwise
constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal under any of the
following circumstances:
1. A parent, guardian or other person entrusted with the care and
supervision of a person under the age of twenty-one or an incompetent
person, and a teacher or other person entrusted with the care and
supervision of a person under the age of twenty-one for a special
purpose, may use physical force, but not deadly physical force, upon
such person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes it
necessary to maintain discipline or to promote the welfare of such
person.
2. A warden or other authorized official of a jail, prison or
correctional institution may, in order to maintain order and discipline,
use such physical force as is authorized by the correction law.
3. A person responsible for the maintenance of order in a common
carrier of passengers, or a person acting under his direction, may use
physical force when and to the extent that he reasonably believes it
necessary to maintain order, but he may use deadly physical force only
when he reasonably believes it necessary to prevent death or serious
physical injury.
4. A person acting under a reasonable belief that another person is
about to commit suicide or to inflict serious physical injury upon
himself may use physical force upon such person to the extent that he
reasonably believes it necessary to thwart such result.
5. A duly licensed physician, or a person acting under a physician's
direction, may use physical force for the purpose of administering a
recognized form of treatment which he or she reasonably believes to be
adapted to promoting the physical or mental health of the patient if (a)
the treatment is administered with the consent of the patient or, if the
patient is under the age of eighteen years or an incompetent person,
with the consent of the parent, guardian or other person entrusted with
the patient's care and supervision, or (b) the treatment is administered
in an emergency when the physician reasonably believes that no one
competent to consent can be consulted and that a reasonable person,
wishing to safeguard the welfare of the patient, would consent.
6. A person may, pursuant to the ensuing provisions of this article,
use physical force upon another person in self-defense or defense of a
third person, or in defense of premises, or in order to prevent larceny
of or criminal mischief to property, or in order to effect an arrest or
prevent an escape from custody. Whenever a person is authorized by any
such provision to use deadly physical force in any given circumstance,
nothing contained in any other such provision may be deemed to negate or
qualify such authorization.
35.15 Justification; use of physical force in defense of a person.
1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subdivision two, use
physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she
reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself, herself or a
third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or
imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person, unless:
(a) The latter's conduct was provoked by the actor with intent to
cause physical injury to another person; or
(b) The actor was the initial aggressor; except that in such case the
use of physical force is nevertheless justifiable if the actor has
withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such
withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing
the incident by the use or threatened imminent use of unlawful physical
force; or
(c) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by
agreement not specifically authorized by law.
2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person
under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or
about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the
actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with
complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no
duty to retreat if he or she is:
(i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor; or
(ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police
officer or a peace officer at the latter's direction, acting pursuant to
section 35.30; or
(b) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing
or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal
sexual act or robbery; or
(c) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing
or attempting to commit a burglary, and the circumstances are such that
the use of deadly physical force is authorized by subdivision three of
section 35.20.
Bob, appreciate your photos but let’s let the lawyers do their thing in NY, okay?