A question came in regarding the legal doctrine of accomplice liability, which I explored at some length last week (LOSD Members see: Mutual Combat, Accomplice Liability, Transferred Intent, and Felony Murder; and if you’re not a member, why not? Bronze-level membership is FREE.) Here’s that question in full, from LOSD Member “226 Blaze” commenting on the Law of Self Defense blog, and then I’ll dive into an explanation of how this all works:
The question is whether a victim V has the same use-of-force rights against an accomplice as they do against the primary perpetrator. If person A threatens a victim with a gun in, let's say at a gas station, and the victim has reason to believe that another person B standing nearby is an accomplice (they walked in together or were seen talking beforehand). A's possession and threat of deadly-force with a gun obviously gives V the ability to use a firearm in self-defense against A, but would A's threat with a gun also transfer over to B? Or would V have to establish a whole new case of self-defense against B?
That's what we tackle in this episode of the Law of Self Defense!
--Andrew
Attorney Andrew F. Branca
Law of Self Defense LLC
NOTE: We tightly limit the amount of our content available on YouTube, because of their decision to completely demonetize our channel. If you like this content and would like to enjoy more, we encourage you to sign up for a FREE Bronze-level membership on our web site at:
0 Comments