Shoplifting is not exactly a life threatening crime, unless the perp was armed. I might consider drawing on them as a warning, but not worth shooting. As in stop, halt you genius!!
It sounds like she was a good shot, however. I only skimmed the article, where was he shot?? If in the back, there is no defense on her part.
Emphasizes the need for persons holding a CCDW to know the legal elements required to employ an affirmative claim of self-defense. Drawing a weapon satisfies the requirement for assault in most states and subjects you to deadly force used against you as you now meet one of the 5 requirements - you are now an imminent threat.
The five elements:
1. innocence
2. imminence
3. proportionality
4. avoidance
5. reasonableness
the avoidance element is not required in so called stand your ground states. All elements have to be present to justify self defense.
A slightly different look at 4 of the 5 elements above (innocence excluded) is AOJ+P. Does the BG have the
Ability and
Opportunity to cause serious harm and are you in
Jeopardy plus are you are able to
Preclude (avoid, de-escalate) the imminent threat?
The shooter was not in AOJ at the trigger pull instant. Ergo deep doo-doo.
Andrew Branca, who contributed to a thread on George Zimmerman as his trial was underway, has written an excellent book called
The Law of Self Defense in which the chapters 2-5 discuss @navitimer806’s five points above (in that order) in detail. Are we reading the same books or is there something more?