Originally Posted by Starman
Originally Posted by The_Real_Hawkeye

I said the self-defense claim is imperfect because the initial approach to a suspected burglar was questionable, legally speaking. But after said approach (and keep in mind that we don't know that a firearm was ever pointed at the victim), the victim of the shooting attempted to grab a loaded firearm from one of the men attempting citizen's arrest. That's an attack against which one ordinarily would possess a right to use lethal force to thwart, since it can be reasonably assumed that a suspected burglar, once he has disarmed you, will use said weapon against you.


Someone is repeatedly chasing you with truck and shotgun
blocking your path and telling you to stop!. ,
do they have to point the 12 Guage directly at you
before you take it as an imminent threat?

That's why the claim to self-defense on the part of the white folks involved is imperfect rather than perfect. Their defense of engaging in a citizen's arrest isn't quite legally sound, since they didn't personally witness him engage in a felony. But it's also not murder, since they believed they were acting within their rights to make an arrest, and had no apparent intent to lynch or shoot the fellow, but merely to hold him for the police, while possessing arms for self defense should he become violent. Once the suspected burglar tried to grab a loaded weapon, the perfect right of self-defense on the part of the white folks would normally have protected their use of lethal force, but due to their being legally in the wrong in attempting an arrest of someone they merely suspected of a felony, they cannot claim the perfect right of self defense, but rather only an imperfect right, which subjects them to a charge of manslaughter.