p*********e
发帖数: 32207 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Automobile 讨论区 】
发信人: pandamalone (0000~史前圣灵猫熊), 信区: Automobile
标 题: Re: 关于前几天停车场差点拔枪的例子，请看这起事故有参考价值br />
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Mon Jun 10 23:41:59 2013, 美东)
看了一下报道,这个警探是off duty的时候夜间出行
与对方路上产生摩擦后两边都停了车
对方先开门向他走过来,然后他开门迎上去用枪射击对方
大致查了一下maryland的用枪自卫的相关法律,根据wiki:
maryland对于use of deadly force in self-defense是通过判例来形成规定的,
而不是statute,判例的结论来自
State v. Faulkner, 301 Md. 482, 485, 483 A.2d 759, 761 (1984)
详情说:
the Court of Appeals of Maryland summarized those principles, and stated
that a homicide, other than felony murder, is justified on the ground of
self-defense if the following criteria are satisfied:
(1) The accused must have had reasonable grounds to believe himself in
apparent imminent or immediate danger of death or serious bodily harm from
his assailant or potential assailant;
(2) The accused must have in fact believed himself in this danger;
(3) The accused claiming the right of self defense must not have been the
aggressor or provoked the conflict;
(4) The force used must have not been unreasonable and excessive, that is,
the force must not have been more force than the exigency demanded.
See also Roach v. State, 358 Md. 418, 429-30, 749 A.2d 787, 793 (2000).
这4个要件都要满足才可以合法用致命武器自卫
但在这个案子里面,用枪一方主动下车开枪,
首先他要想证明自己有合理的理由认为自己将受到死亡威胁或严重伤害就未见得容易
其次虽然对方下了车,但他自己也下车,那不好说他就一定不是那个aggressor
最后如果对方手里没武器的话他用枪击毙对方是否能被界定没有使用excessive force,
也很不好界定
综合这几点,至少检方charge他谋杀或误杀是有足够理由的
至于他是否能拿出更多的证据支持自己合法自卫,那就看法庭上怎么说了
顺便,maryland的castle law只提及home,并未提及occupied vehicle和dwelling
也就是说仅仅接近甚至试图进入vehicle都不能作为合法用枪自卫的理由
而仍然必须审视前面的四个条件,满足时才能合法自卫.
after |
|
