Good talk on blocks

[Van Canna]

Complainant is Victim

Our criminal justice system is geared on the concept that whomever makes the complaint is the injured party , the victim. This automatically casts the target of the complainant’s report as the perpetrator.

The stage is now set for another role reversal. On the scene , the criminal hunter became the righteously hunted and all was well.

Now, in the immediate second state of the event that follows, the perpetrator has claimed for himself the role of the victim, and has successfully transferred his true role as the criminal onto the armed citizen who was his original intended victim.

This is why it is so important to make a report to the police immediately after the incident, even during the incident if this is feasible. Dial 911 dispatcher, where you can be sure that your phone call will be taped recorded and time-logged.

It is critical to show that you were the first to call in. If the perpetrator has called in first, you may be seen as a clever criminal simply by trying to establish an alibi when you make your call.

And to keep in mind is that anytime a gun is pulled, there will be a police investigation, and a police report will be on file and available to your attacker who will then know where you live.

[Van Canna]

Always remember, in the aftermath of such an incident, you are in a race to the telephone. The first person to call in gets to be the victim/complainant. The last one to call in can expect to be automatically designated as the criminal suspect.

[Van Canna]

When you Must Depart

On rare occasions, the circumstances are such that you must leave the scene. Perhaps you or someone else is injured, there is no access to communication, and medical care must be sought elsewhere.

If circumstances dictate you must leave the scene, scream the following at the top of your lungs: “Someone call the police and an ambulance! I’m going for the police and an ambulance!”

Perhaps there is still danger to you and others if you remain at the scene.

Then, as you depart, head for the police station or for a phone where you can call the appropriate authorities, and make the call post haste!

Because of the “flight equals guilt” precept, the person who leaves the scene will always be hard to defend.

He will be harder to defend if the totality of his actions gives the impression that he left just so he wouldn’t get in trouble.

That, after all, is why criminals flee the scene of their crimes.

It will be somewhat less difficult to defend if the court can see that the citizen fled because he was terrified by the action of the person he was forced to shoot.

It will be easier still to defend if it can be shown that it was necessary for him to leave the scene to summon needed rescue and law enforcement personnel.

But once the armed citizen has won the initial encounter, it is always best to stay at the scene if at all possible.

There is enormous weight of the “flight equals guilt” principle, a weight you’ll be pushing against through out the entire aftermath of the incident if you make the amateur mistake of departing the scene after what was otherwise a perfectly legal and justifiable application of defensive force.

[Van Canna]

Whatever the situation you might find yourself into, despite any thinking now you will be able to handle yourself with police interrogators in the aftermath of adrenalized chaos...you will not [most of us] have the ability to remain silent....

The ability to remain alert or calm _ to maintain intellectual keenness, and the ability to perceive verbal pitfalls, and to express in “safe mode” will be utterly compromised as we shall find ourselves at the limit of our mental resources; utterly at a loss, as we battle between “lip zip” and “logorrhea” [diarrhea of the mouth]

Expect this to happen to you. And you will be surprised at the things you will blabber about in that state of mind, things that later, when brought to your attention, will make you shudder.

I have come up against this insidious problem many times during my investigations of fatalities when interviewing clients with a copy of the police report in my hands, containing their statements soon after an event.

The clients would be horrified and utterly in denial of having said such things.

It is really a very serious calamitous consequence of fighting for any reason.

[Van Canna]

Post-assault, you'll probably be suffering from what is known as adrenal-induced Tachypsychia.

This causes time distortion, time loss, memory distortion and memory loss.

All of these affect your ability to make an objective statement if the police become involved. When/if you do make a statement it is hardly likely to be accurate considering these facts.

Don't put pen to paper otherwise. A police cell can be a very lonely place when you're not used to it, and the police can often be guilty of rushing, even pressuring you for a quick statement.

This pressure can be subtle but effective: being left alone for long periods of time, being told that you might be sent to prison, even the good cop-bad cop routine (yes, honestly). Many a tough guy has turned from hard to lard after a few hours surrounded by those four grey walls.

Under these circumstances it’s very easy to say things you really don't want to say, just so that you can go home.

Read this again and again...

[Van Canna]

Norm Abrahamson »

Van,
A lot of questions popped up between my visits to the forum. I’m not a criminal law specialist, but I will address your questions to the best of my ability.

"But something must be said before shutting up_ Norm would you agree with this:

1. “ officer, with all due respect I will not answer any questions until after I have spoken with my lawyer, I want to see a lawyer. I am hurt, I don’t feel good, chest pains, mentally distraught, nausea etc., I want an ambulance to take me to a hospital."

A: Nothing wrong with this. You should be polite, and letting the officer know that you will talk to a lawyer should clue him in that you won’t be railroaded. It will probably make an experienced officer more careful.

"Norm, after saying the above, can you follow up with this ? _

" I was attacked for no reason, I was in fear of my life, I tried to talk my way out, I tried to get away, but could not, and I had to defend myself."

A: I believe, the less you say the better. You don’t want to contradict yourself later. Don’t say what you did, but only what he did. IE: He tried to kill me.

“ I will sign the complaint.”
“Evidence is here/there.”

Are you really in any condition to read through a complaint at that time? You would have to list facts and in effect tell your story. Don’t promise anything other than talking later after having sought medical attention and legal counsel.

“Witnesses are there.”

A: Only point out a sympathetic witness, and only if you are directly asked. You never know what a witness will say and you will not be present during that interview.

"NORM_ does the police have the right to ask you more questions after you volunteer the above information and after you indicated at the beginning you want to see a lawyer before you answer any questions? "

A: If you are in custody, once you UNEQUIVOCALLY ask for a lawyer, the questioning must stop.

If you are still at the scene, there is a question as to whether you are in custody.

Ask the question: “Am I free to go?” If the answer is yes, then go. If the answer is no, then consider yourself in custody.

"NORM_ If the police places you under arrest and 'Mirandizes' you _ does it have the right to video tape you under questioning without your consent? "

A: A lot of police departments routinely tape interviews. They don’t need your permission for that BUT, there shouldn’t be an interview. You have the right to remain silent, USE IT.

"NORM_ would you as the defense attorney be able to stall any police interrogation for 72 hours, if no arrest is made? I take it that after arrest the defendant has no obligation to submit to questioning by the police if he has a lawyer. "

A: No suspect ever has an obligation to speak to police.

I don’t do criminal defense work, but a defense attorney will only agree to an interview if he thinks there is an advantage to do so under the circumstances. It’s a case by case decision.

"NORM_ If no arrest is made and you can stall the police 24/48/72 hours _ is the defendant obligated to answer questions in person to the police or can you as the attorney tell the police you will provide them with a of 'written statement' of the client?"

A: If you are a defendant, that is, you have been charged, you absolutely cannot be made to give any type of statement. Even if you are simply a “victim” or “witness” you have a right to refuse to answer questions that may incriminate you.

In any event, your attorney should be present at any interview. He can instruct you not to answer any question. Then he is the bad guy stopping you from talking.

I hope that is helpful, but remember, there is no substitute for competent counsel when you are in danger of becoming a criminal defendant.

Sincerely,

Norm Abrahamson

[Van Canna]

All good points. I would point out to any evidence, such as some discarded weapon by your attacker or anything else of relevance.

I suppose is OK to say that you had no choice but to try and protect yourself when attacked, but no details.

[Van Canna]

The implication being you call the police first and report the incident.

Yet when you think about it_ the event may be over in a flash_ you may not even be able to identify the punks_ and, once you report this to the police, you may find yourself in a big pile of dung to sell justification.

Then if the police should 'catch' the punks, they will lie, and they will be able to get a copy of the police report with your name and address in it, and possibly carry on some revenge.

Tough call.

But today, most likely you will be on camera.

[Van Canna]

I agree with not saying what you did in detail, but I would think you must make the claim of self defense from the ‘get go’ _

“ I just defended myself” _ this is what a State trooper indicated to me should be said_ without providing any details as to what you did to defend yourself.


"Where there's a claim of self-defense, which there is in this case, there's usually no immediate arrest. But the case is under active investigation,"


“Did you shoot this man”? _ Answer_ I just defended myself_

“How many shots did you fire”? I don’t know I just defended myself.

“Did you hit punch- kick this guy” _I don’t know_ I just defended myself_

Not easy to do under the grip of ‘logorrhea’ but something that should be part of our dojo practice somehow.

Like ‘name _ rank_ and serial number’ I was taught to only give_ under enemy interrogation. The police will be a ‘friendly enemy’ at that time.

However there are other considerations here:

In most situations, the responding police will investigate to determine if a crime was actually committed.

And barring the use of deadly force _ knife/gun_

say just a fist fight where there are punches and kicks exchanged with the victim only fighting for the sole purpose of defending himself_ the investigating police may have the discretion to determine in short order that the use of force in self defense was not unlawful.

So the legal proceedings may end right then and there.

If you ‘refuse to talk’ the police will not have enough information to make a decision and may well arrest you based on whatever evidence there is, and present the case to the local, prosecutor’s office for further consideration.

So by not talking you get yourself in a real mess. The police may well use this argument with you during the interrogation to ‘convince’ you to talk.

Much pressure will be brought to bear upon your mind not able to think clearly.

[Van Canna]

https://www.policeone.com/active-shoote ... xYJV6juNi/

The mass violence cycle

An otherwise normal person, no matter how stressed, doesn’t just suddenly “snap” and go on a killing spree. In virtually all of the cases that have been studied by behavioral scientists, there has emerged a predictable pattern in the evolution of most mass violence incidents.

The perpetrators are typically individuals with longstanding histories of contact with the legal, mental health, and/or substance abuse treatment systems; such was the case with the recent Omaha mall shooter, Robert Hawkins, as well as the Virginia Tech gunman this past April.

The cycle that leads to the lethal explosion typically begins when an individual experiences a build-up of stressors stemming from health, employment, or romantic problems.

Whereas most of us would be feel distressed under these circumstances, we generally try to do what we can to fix the problem, grumble about what we can’t control, distract ourselves with something enjoyable, and generally soldier on.

[Van Canna]

But the violence-prone individual is typically an externalizer – he’s looking for someone to blame and his reaction often involves a noxious brew of persecutory ideation, projection of fault, and violent revenge fantasies.

This is partly due to his general sense of narcissistic entitlement and tendency toward impulsive self-gratification, paradoxically fueled by his self-perceived incompetence to take any real constructive action.

As these thoughts and emotions continue to percolate, the individual increasingly isolates himself from the input of others and accretes a mindset of self-justified martyrdom, often leading to hopeless suicidality with a retaliatory tinge: “If they can screw me, I can screw them back – bigtime.

Why should other people go on having what they want and enjoying themselves, when I can’t? I may be going out, but I’m not going out alone.”

The perpetrator fantasizes that after he’s gone, his Ramboesque exploits will be reported to millions of people around the world; his name will be a household word.

Far from meekly slinking away, our hero will leave this world in a blaze of martial glory – just like in the movies.

[Van Canna]

The actual means of carrying out this commando action will be dictated by availability and, in our society, the easy obtainability of firearms usually makes this the method of choice.

The operational plan may be executed impulsively and immediately, or it may undergo meticulous planning with numerous revisions:

Omaha mall witnesses later recalled Hawkins scouting out the place and entering and exiting several times.

The final step is the violent act itself, which may occur any time from hours to months to years following the final perceived injustice. Vengeance has a long memory.

[Van Canna]

Who commits mass murder?

As noted above, many people get their asses kicked by life but they don’t take their pain out violently on helpless or innocent people. Behavioral scientists have developed a rough sort of typology of clinical syndromes that may be associated with mass violence.

But bear in mind that most individuals with these diagnoses don’t commit murder or violence – they may not necessarily be the most pleasant people to deal with, but most are essentially harmless.

It’s important that you don’t go around profiling the weird but otherwise peaceful citizens in your patrol area as a bunch of bombs ready to blow.

They’re probably not, but understanding what makes them tick may help you intervene earlier and more effectively should trouble start to develop.

[Van Canna]

Mass violence perpetrators with paranoid personality disorder have shown a longstanding pattern of misinterpreting the words, actions, and motives of others as threatening, demeaning, or exploitive.

They may lie low and secretly nurse their grudges or they may be quite outspoken in their complaints, often filing numerous grievances, lawsuits, and restraining orders against employers, neighbors, or ex-mates before resorting to violence.

Individuals with antisocial personality disorder are likely to have left a long wake of employment, financial, legal, and personal troubles behind them.

They are motivated exclusively by self-interest and will utilize any means necessary, including violence and intimidation, to get what they want.

They are also usually quite impulsive and nonreflective and thus often compound their troubles through poor judgment and thoughtless actions. Violence may be resorted to as “payback” for being wronged in some way.

And as we know, many of these type individuals are attracted to martial arts.

[Van Canna]

Narcissistic personality disordered perpetrators feel a sense of entitlement: good things should come to them by virtue of their inherent superiority and specialness and, when they don’t, somebody’s got to pay.

These individuals can be very friendly and expansive one moment, as long as things are going their way and they’re getting the praise and recognition they think they deserve.

But their exquisitely thin skin may sustain a fatal ego-wound if they feel slighted or disrespected. Then, they may resort to violence to “even the score.”

Perpetrators with borderline personality disorder experience drastic mood swings, mercurial personal attachments, and extremely intense emotional reactions.

Having idealized a particular job, mentor, or romantic partner, the borderline individual may be plunged into rageful despair by a subsequent rebuff or disappointment, real or imagined.

Their thirst for vindication and restoration of self-worth becomes an all-consuming passion and may include destructive or violent acts, usually centering around a specific person they once adored but have now demonized.

Many of these instances turn into hostage-barricade situations when the subject returns to the home or worksite to show the offending parties “what you’ve done to me.”