TexasCHLforum.com

https://www.thedcregister.com/news-late ... ting-death

In Feb 2017 a woman called in a suspicious person who had partially blocked her driveway and a street lane with a pickup truck. Conservation officer responded, determined the male driver was acting erratically and was impaired, and went to cuff the male. A fight broke out which the officer started losing, as the male suspect was larger and stronger. The suspect apparently tried to get to the officer's handgun.

The adult daughter of the woman who called police saw what was happening, and came out with her own gun and shot the suspect in the upper shoulder, which succeeded in stopping the attack. The mother and daughter then administered CPR to the man the daughter shot, but he later died.

The dead suspect turned out to have methamphetamine and other drugs in his system as well as some lesser criminal offenses and arrests. The DA investigated and declined to pursue any charges against the daughter.

So far so good.


But now, a little over a year later, the family of the dead man have filed a wrongful death suit against the daughter and police agencies. One of the local police officers who is president of the local FOP chapter has launched a GoFundMe page to help the daughter with her legal defenses. The officer correctly notes that the police officers being sued will be covered by the State and the FOP, but the citizen who came to an officer' aid is on her own.

The daughter is being represented by Guy Relford. As well as being a lawyer he is also a firearms instructor and a 2A activist. He does a radio show called The Gun Guy on Indianapolis radio station WIBC, which has been a popular radio station since probably before I was a kid in Indiana 50 years ago. So I think she has decent representation with knowledge of in ins and outs of self-defense (of third party), but funds to pay for it would help.

Story: https://www.themaven.net/bluelivesmatte ... 1w/?full=1

GoFundMe page: https://www.gofundme.com/kystie039s-best-defense

i think since the man had meth in his system and was assaulting a police officer, this shouldn't even be happening. this is classic "he was a good guy. he didn't deserve to die" people make choices. choices have consequences. he chose to do meth and then assault a police officer. the consequence was a gun shot and death. case closed.

She should counter-sue the deceased criminal's family for the pain and suffering she went through as a result of having to save a policeman's life due to the criminal's attack.

In a truly sane and just system, this case would take about 5 minutes for a judge to throw out and make the deceased criminal's family pay her attorney fees.

Grundy1133 wrote:i think since the man had meth in his system and was assaulting a police officer, this shouldn't even be happening. this is classic "he was a good guy. he didn't deserve to die" people make choices. choices have consequences. he chose to do meth and then assault a police officer. the consequence was a gun shot and death. case closed.

If you want to do something about it, she has a GoFundMe page. Kick in a few dollars. Help set an example that lawsuits like this should be/are unwinnable.

I know little about civil trials. I served on one civil jury where a woman was suiting a super market (deep pockets) for an injury sustained on their property. She got nothing because there was not a shred of negligence evidence ever presented.

So I have to wonder about this case. Exactly how and from whom are the plaintiff's looking to get paid? With the supermarket, I'm assuming that there was an insurance company or a self-insurance arrangement. If the defendant/police defender needs a go-fund-me setup to help pay for legal expenses, I wouldn't expect deep enough pockets for any kind of large settlement.

The lawsuit could be the deceased criminal's family's way to trying to restore their "good name." Why would a lawyer take such a case and, perhaps more importantly, who would be funding it? I'm sure that lawyers take cases on contingency but I would expect that there was some reasonable chance of success and source of funds when the success is achieved.

I don't get it.

As I said, the dead suspect's family is suing the woman and the police agency involved (in this case the Indiana Department of Natural Resources). Even without the state being involved, the woman may have liability insurance that the plaintiff's could tap, and I think this would not be known until the suit is initiated. Monetarily I think the DNR is the real target.

Also, no matter how violent/stupid/drug-addled/insane the person who ends up dead through his own criminal action is, almost invariably his family can't accept that he had any responsibility and has to find someone else to blame. So there is an ego issue involved, they can't accept reality that their child/sibling/parent/relative really was not a very good person, they have to warp the rest of reality to conform to their views and relieve the cognitive dissonance.

See also "multiple genders".

Though it still may require an attorney if civil case filed, it really makes me thankful for Texas and CPRC 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY.
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified in Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant's use of force or deadly force, as applicable.

rtschl wrote:Though it still may require an attorney if civil case filed, it really makes me thankful for Texas and CPRC 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY.
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified in Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant's use of force or deadly force, as applicable.

I like Florida's civil immunity better. If you are sued and win because you were engaged in self-defense/defense of another, you are entitled to reasonable legal fees, including income compensation.

ELB wrote:

rtschl wrote:Though it still may require an attorney if civil case filed, it really makes me thankful for Texas and CPRC 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY.
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified in Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant's use of force or deadly force, as applicable.

I like Florida's civil immunity better. If you are sued and win because you were engaged in self-defense/defense of another, you are entitled to reasonable legal fees, including income compensation.

Good luck getting paid by the family that would sue you for killing their little murderer.

I like your thinking... but...

RoyGBiv wrote:

ELB wrote:

rtschl wrote:Though it still may require an attorney if civil case filed, it really makes me thankful for Texas and CPRC 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY.
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified in Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant's use of force or deadly force, as applicable.

I like Florida's civil immunity better. If you are sued and win because you were engaged in self-defense/defense of another, you are entitled to reasonable legal fees, including income compensation.

Good luck getting paid by the family that would sue you for killing their little murderer.

I like your thinking... but...

You can see you and get awarded money from an indigent all you want. Doesn’t mean you’ll see a dime!

bblhd672 wrote:She should counter-sue the deceased criminal's family for the pain and suffering she went through as a result of having to save a policeman's life due to the criminal's attack.

In a truly sane and just system, this case would take about 5 minutes for a judge to throw out and make the deceased criminal's family pay her attorney fees.

Looks like a perfect case to push for a Indiana immunity law... and immunity laws in other states...so this never happens again.

What I don't understand is if the court found her within her legal rights of self defense (and defending the LEO) then how on Earth can the family of the criminal sue the woman who was protecting the LEO and herself? If I was the judge I'd just laugh and dismiss the case...

Paladin wrote:Looks like a perfect case to push for a Indiana immunity law... and immunity laws in other states...so this never happens again.

However the way things are going right now... I would not be surprised if she lost. It should be thrown out though.