I understand that's the consensus you came to, but it's incorrect. If all you say is "I was in fear for my life," then you have not met the requirements of TPC §§9.31 & 9.32 for using deadly force. It was the facts related by the Chief that established a reasonable belief that deadly force was immediately necessary. Some people may be in fear, some may not, but those facts gave rise to justification under the Penal Code. If "fear" was an element, then the lack of fear would mean deadly force cannot be used.frankie_the_yankee wrote:Actually, if you review the other thread, we established that being in reasonable fear for your (or another innocent) life was more or less a brief way of expressing that the requirements for deadly force had been met without quoting the full verbiage of the statute.txinvestigator wrote: NO, no no. Being in fear of your life means nothing. (didn't we JUST have a thread about it?)
I would refer you especially to the comments of APD Chief Acevedo as he describes the circumstances of a recent officer-involved shooting.
I believe I know what you mean, but my concern, and txinvestigator's, is that some people can read such statements and think that "anytime I'm afraid, I can shoot." That could get some good people into a lot of trouble.
Chas.