Watch what you post

[arod757]

I just finished taking a deposition where a lot of remarks were used against the deponent that he wrote on several different forums on the net. They were easily traced back to him using his IP address.

It got me thinking about something my CHL instructor said as he tore up our written tests when everybody had passed: I tore these up in case some of you put "Shoot to Kill" instead of "Shoot to stop" on one of the questions. I don't want some lawyer digging that up and using it against you if you have to defend yourself and use deadly force.

I've seen comments or maybe signature lines such as "Shoot first, ask questions later" browsing gun forums the last couple of months (since I started the CHL process). Maybe not necessarily on here, but possibly. A plaintiff's attorney will use anything and everything against you in a civil suit. Watch yourselves!

Just thought I'd give you guys something to think about.

[AEA]

A plaintiff's attorney will use anything and everything against you in a civil suit. Watch yourselves!

Just thought I'd give you guys something to think about.

No need to think much about it in Texas.......
There are two chances that a civil suit will even be brought:
1. Slim
2. None

[seamusTX]

I agree that lawsuits over defensive shootings are rare in Texas. I can't name the most recent one.

However, I see things posted in various forums (rarely in this one) that make me wince. The run-of-the-mill ambulance chaser is not going to file a suit that he knows he can't win; but a crusading lawyer might go after someone who has a history of combative or bigoted postings.

Some of these lawyers have deep-pocket backing, and defending a civil suit is ruinously expensive for the average person.

I agree with Arod757 that people should not post statements that they do not want to see attributed to them on the front page of the Dallas Morning News or Houston Chronicle, or in court.

- Jim

[nedmoore]

Email stands for Evidence Mail.

[Kerbouchard]

I have seen this come up a few times in different forums and I still have not been able to find one source case to even begin to back up what the OP is talking about.

An answer to a hypothetical question is rarely admitted into evidence, and when it is, it's an expert's opinion on a response to a hypothetical question with facts very similiar to the ones that the exact case has to do with.

If you admit to crimes on the internet or e-mail, then I could easily see how that could be used against you, but as it is the DA doesn't know your frame of mind...You could have been drinking since 11 a.m. What you might do or say as an anonymous poster while intoxicated might be much different than how you would handle a situation when confronted by it.

Another thing, how many people completely lock up their computer, delete all the stored passwords, and make sure no other person could access your account? How many of your passwords are a pet, or a word? Can the administrator edit a post?

At best, they could trace a post to a household...and they still couldn't prove who was the one typing, and what state of mind that person was in.

Also, people on the internet are notorious for not being truthful, either about their profession, looks, age, gender, marital status, etc, etc, etc.

Some people get on these internet forums just to escape their real life, to be somebody else for a while. If there was actually a way to find out who everybody was, I would be willing to bet at least 20% of most of these 'gun forums' aren't even old enough to purchase a handgun. People embilish the truth sometimes.

So, if anybody can provide 1, even 1 reference case where an answer to a hypothetical question prior to an act, was used in court to establish motive/intent, I would be interested. I couldn't find anything. Everytime I looked up hypothetical and evidence, all it came up with is expert testimony. And if somehow you find something about a hypothetical question answered by the defendant prior to the act he is being charged for being used in court, check to see if it was answered over the internet.

So far, pretty much the only thing I've seen for electronic evidence all has to do with finance, child predators, libel, etc.

[HighVelocity]

Don't post anything on the www or in email that you wouldn't want the entire world to see. When you hit the submit/send button, it's out there forever.

[Tactical_Texan_CHL]

That's why I never post pictures with faces. I'm pretty careful when it comes to what's on the internet. Ya never know who else looks through these pages.

[57Coastie]

Don't post anything on the www or in email that you wouldn't want the entire world to see.

The only improvement which might be made to this resolution is one I saw posted in a law office: "Whenever you are tempted to touch the "Send key" you should assume that everyone in the world will see your email." A very slight, but meaningful, change in emphasis.

Depending on your viewpoint, of course, failure to observe this rule might have positive results, witness the recent resignation of the DA of neighboring Harris County. Many believe, or at least hope, that this could be a positive result so far as those assembled here are concerned.

Jim

[arod757]

I have seen this come up a few times in different forums and I still have not been able to find one source case to even begin to back up what the OP is talking about.

An answer to a hypothetical question is rarely admitted into evidence, and when it is, it's an expert's opinion on a response to a hypothetical question with facts very similiar to the ones that the exact case has to do with.

If you admit to crimes on the internet or e-mail, then I could easily see how that could be used against you, but as it is the DA doesn't know your frame of mind...You could have been drinking since 11 a.m. What you might do or say as an anonymous poster while intoxicated might be much different than how you would handle a situation when confronted by it.

Another thing, how many people completely lock up their computer, delete all the stored passwords, and make sure no other person could access your account? How many of your passwords are a pet, or a word? Can the administrator edit a post?

At best, they could trace a post to a household...and they still couldn't prove who was the one typing, and what state of mind that person was in.

Also, people on the internet are notorious for not being truthful, either about their profession, looks, age, gender, marital status, etc, etc, etc.

Some people get on these internet forums just to escape their real life, to be somebody else for a while. If there was actually a way to find out who everybody was, I would be willing to bet at least 20% of most of these 'gun forums' aren't even old enough to purchase a handgun. People embilish the truth sometimes.

So, if anybody can provide 1, even 1 reference case where an answer to a hypothetical question prior to an act, was used in court to establish motive/intent, I would be interested. I couldn't find anything. Everytime I looked up hypothetical and evidence, all it came up with is expert testimony. And if somehow you find something about a hypothetical question answered by the defendant prior to the act he is being charged for being used in court, check to see if it was answered over the internet.

So far, pretty much the only thing I've seen for electronic evidence all has to do with finance, child predators, libel, etc.

I was simply making an observation that MAY be relevant at some point if you end up using your weapon.

The case I was referring to was a divorce proceeding I took where plaintiff's counsel brought these forum posts out and questioned the deponent about them during a deposition. That's not to say any of this will be admitted by a judge if it goes to trial, but it did get me thinking, and I thought I'd share my thoughts on this forum.

[Kerbouchard]

I was simply making an observation that MAY be relevant at some point if you end up using your weapon.

The case I was referring to was a divorce proceeding I took where plaintiff's counsel brought these forum posts out and questioned the deponent about them during a deposition. That's not to say any of this will be admitted by a judge if it goes to trial, but it did get me thinking, and I thought I'd share my thoughts on this forum.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to come off as attacking you, or your post. I think it's thought provoking and it's something to think about.

One of the first things we are told/taught is if we are forced to use a gun in defense to not make any statements without a lawyer present. I think that is much more important in other states, but I know I won't be making ANY statements the night of, if it ever happens, and I will definitely not be posting my story to an internet forum. I completely agree with you that what you say, can and will be held against you.

The part I have a problem with is when you hear a report on a GG stopping a BG from committing a crime.
Inevitably, if the BG lives, somebody is going to say that they wish the GG was a better shot, and then somebody will say, you shouldn't be saying that because if you ever blah blah blah blah.

I think you are completely right that nobody should ever post something illegal, and that nobody should ever post about a crime they committed, and that nobody should ever post about an incident that is currently under investigation.

It just annoys me when somebody answers a hypothetical question in either a more forceful manner than somebody else agrees with, or in a joking manner, and the Keyboard Lawyers start telling them about how it will be used against them to prove intent.

I say Kill 'em all, and let God sort 'em out...(BTW, if you are a member of a Jury on my trial and you are reading this, I was kidding about everything. I'm really a very nice guy, and you should definitely throw this case out. Courts adjourned.)

[seamusTX]

I don't think the kind of hypothetical discussion that we frequently see in this forum are going to get someone in trouble, because this forum is effectively moderated.

In unmoderated forums and newsgroups I have seen people writing that they want to kill illegal aliens, certain racial or religious groups, BATFE and FBI agents, and similar sentiments. You don't often see forum postings used as evidence in criminal cases, because the facts of the crime speak for themselves. But I think it is possible.

- Jim

[The Annoyed Man]

Kerbouchard, what about the following scenario... On some random gun board, you state your intention to fire a coup de grace shot to an assailant's head should you ever have to deploy and fire your weapon against an attacker. You carry a pistol in .45 ACP. Weeks or months later, you legitimately have to actually fire your weapon in self defense. You fire two quick shots, intending to hit center of chest. Your first one goes a little lower than you had intended because you fired before completing your draw, wounding your attacker in the upper abdomen/solar plexus, arguably taking him out of the fight then and there. Your followup shot, right on the heels of the first one, goes a little high due to the recoil of the first shot, striking the assailant in the head, killing him instantly.

Now, first off, you're a better shot than I am! But that aside, even though the shooting was righteous, couldn't your previous words in which you stated your intention to administer a coup de grace shot to the head be used to poison the case against you? I agree that it could not be admitted necessarily as evidence, but I wonder if there isn't some way that a zealous prosecuting attorney couldn't work it in there somehow - even though the two events, your previous writing, and the shooting, are completely unrelated.

Just curious...

[Kerbouchard]

I don't think the kind of hypothetical discussion that we frequently see in this forum are going to get someone in trouble, because this forum is effectively moderated.
In unmoderated forums and newsgroups I have seen people writing that they want to kill illegal aliens, certain racial or religious groups, BATFE and FBI agents, and similar sentiments. You don't often see forum postings used as evidence in criminal cases, because the facts of the crime speak for themselves. But I think it is possible.
- Jim

Jim, first of all, you are right. This board seems very well moderated, and I enjoy it even though I am a newbie here. I only visit 2 forums, this and defensivecarry, and both seem to have a pretty good group of people, and are very well moderated. I purposely don't go to forums like you speak of, where bigotry and disrespect are rampant. I like forums where people can learn from each other, and even disagree, in a civil manner. I learn more from somebody I disagree with then from somebody that agrees with everything I say, but only if they can disagree in a civil and intellectual manner. It also helps to refine my arguments by seeing other people's points.

Kerbouchard, what about the following scenario... On some random gun board, you state your intention to fire a coup de grace shot to an assailant's head should you ever have to deploy and fire your weapon against an attacker. You carry a pistol in .45 ACP. Weeks or months later, you legitimately have to actually fire your weapon in self defense. You fire two quick shots, intending to hit center of chest. Your first one goes a little lower than you had intended because you fired before completing your draw, wounding your attacker in the upper abdomen/solar plexus, arguably taking him out of the fight then and there. Your followup shot, right on the heels of the first one, goes a little high due to the recoil of the first shot, striking the assailant in the head, killing him instantly.

Now, first off, you're a better shot than I am! But that aside, even though the shooting was righteous, couldn't your previous words in which you stated your intention to administer a coup de grace shot to the head be used to poison the case against you? I agree that it could not be admitted necessarily as evidence, but I wonder if there isn't some way that a zealous prosecuting attorney couldn't work it in there somehow - even though the two events, your previous writing, and the shooting, are completely unrelated.

Just curious...

Annoyed Man, I suppose it's possible. I have been unable to find a case where that has happened, but there is always the infamous 'Test Case'.

Assuming it got past the Grand Jury, which in TX, as we all know, defensive shootings, even questionable ones, rarely receive a True Bill from the grand jury, then I suppose I would have to hire an attorney.

I would say my defense attorney could find a LEO that would testify that they are trained to stop the threat in a deadly force situation. I would assume a defense attorney would call a physician to testify to the fact that somebody who is wounded in the abdomen can live for hours or days without medical treatment before they die(if they do at all), and that somebody with a direct hit to the heart can exercise conscious function for 12-13 seconds before the lack of blood to the brain incapacitates them. And during that time, they can easily pull a trigger. I would have my defense attorney call a clinical psychiatrist to testify about what the mind is going through in a 'fight or flight' situation and how inclusion, auditory lapses, panic, tunnel vision, etc can play into how many shots are fired. I would then have my defense attorney submit into evidence the testing from trained LEO when they were told to fire when a cue came on and cease firing when the cue came off, and the fact that the majority of LEO fired 2-3 times after the cue went away. I would then have my attorney submit into evidence the statutes relating to use of lethal force, and describe how use of lethal force was justified.

In summary, I would want the case defended on it's merits. If somehow it got into evidence I would have my attorney cross examine whoever the DA uses to submit the posts into evidence. I would have him ask about cookies, saved passwords, state of mind, other people with access to the computer, cracked passwords, admin privileges, and differences between the 'hypothetical' and the facts of the case.

If all of that didn't work, I would seriously question how I ended up in IL or CA. I have more respect for a jury of my peers than to worry about an unscrupulous Dist Attorney(another shameless plug for the juries in case they are reading this).

[stevie_d_64]

I don't think the kind of hypothetical discussion that we frequently see in this forum are going to get someone in trouble, because this forum is effectively moderated.

In unmoderated forums and newsgroups I have seen people writing that they want to kill illegal aliens, certain racial or religious groups, BATFE and FBI agents, and similar sentiments. You don't often see forum postings used as evidence in criminal cases, because the facts of the crime speak for themselves. But I think it is possible.

- Jim

absolutely 100% agree

We've had the envelope pushed to the brink in a few instances, but for the most part the forum polices itself, and still provides a mountain of experience and counsel both public and in private message conversations, that I believe are second to none!

[03Lightningrocks]

Kerbouchard, what about the following scenario... On some random gun board, you state your intention to fire a coup de grace shot to an assailant's head should you ever have to deploy and fire your weapon against an attacker. You carry a pistol in .45 ACP. Weeks or months later, you legitimately have to actually fire your weapon in self defense. You fire two quick shots, intending to hit center of chest. Your first one goes a little lower than you had intended because you fired before completing your draw, wounding your attacker in the upper abdomen/solar plexus, arguably taking him out of the fight then and there. Your followup shot, right on the heels of the first one, goes a little high due to the recoil of the first shot, striking the assailant in the head, killing him instantly.

Now, first off, you're a better shot than I am! But that aside, even though the shooting was righteous, couldn't your previous words in which you stated your intention to administer a coup de grace shot to the head be used to poison the case against you? I agree that it could not be admitted necessarily as evidence, but I wonder if there isn't some way that a zealous prosecuting attorney couldn't work it in there somehow - even though the two events, your previous writing, and the shooting, are completely unrelated.

Just curious...

I think that when the police examine the scene...and oh how they will examine the scene......they will be able to determine whether your shots where legitimate or not. For instance, the entry of the bullet will tell them if the BG was already laying on the ground or still standing up coming at you. If your hypothetical head shot looks as though you tried to extract revenge...they will nail you with or without the internet.