Question for someone who know OK self defense law.

[Shadowrider]

There is no "Knowing",,,
It's all up to the DA at first,,,
Then the jury if you are charged.

There is no statute in Oklahoma law that states specifically where it's absolutely permissible to kill someone.

You're always taking a chance.

Aarond

.

^^^ This.

Now add some context to it. Say it's 3 months before a national election. Say county and local officials are on the ballot. Consider how many satellite trucks may roll up on the scene of your incident. Etc., Etc.

ALL of this factors in sadly...

 

[Fredkrueger100]

So basically if you own a business you should just let it be destroyed. Because heaven forbid you try and protect YOUR property. Picture if they tried to burn down Scwaab meat company. It’s been it that building for like 100 years. Oklahoma needs a law that clearly states you can use deadly force to protect property. Because I can guarantee this crap will spread everywhere.

 

[nemesis]

he has a growing legal defense fund, so I am not sure he would take a plea in the first place and just fight it out instead.

This just in:

Video Clearly Shows Justified Acts of Self Defense” – BIG UPDATE – Noted Covington Attorney Lin Wood Announces Intent to Defend Kenosha Shooter Kyle Rittenhouse

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...tm_medium=the-gateway-pundit&utm_campaign=dai

 

[SoonerP226]

So basically if you own a business you should just let it be destroyed.

HeyEng’s advice is practical, not philosophical. In Oklahoma, you have a pretty strong case when it comes to self defense, but very little legal protection when it comes to shooting in defense of property, so it really is up to the DA in the case of defending a business. As a practical matter, this is a fight where you can only be sure of winning if you avoid it in the first place.

As I’ve told many a person, there are lots of things I could, legally, do, but I’m not rich enough to make case law.

 

[foghorn918]

All the insurance claims and costs across the country will soon be felt on the backs of all policy holders

 

[TerryMiller]

Oklahoma lawyer here. The law is the law, or so it would seem. However, if you have never been on trial in front of a jury of "your peers" then you don't know what that *really* means. Long story short, there is rarely a scenario that is clear cut. Yes, the written law gives a pretty good guide and yes, attorneys can give you advice that follow along those lines, but in the end..what YOU do and what YOUR jury decides may not follow what you and your attorney team deems to be a lawful action. *IF* a business client asked me what he/she should do it such a scenario, I would tell them this: Increase your insurance coverage if applicable and reduce the deductible, also if applicable. And, finally...the most important advice I would offer: STAY THE F* HOME. Juries are prone to give you the benefit of the doubt if you are defending your HOME. A commercial business in Oklahoma, though? Not nearly enough case law to tell you how it might pan out if you did as some have suggested.

I know there are a lot of questions after the 17 YO was charged with murder. This is a muddled ****-show with no one having clean hands. There is enough video evidence and eyewitness accounts to build and support whatever narrative you want. I (and several other attorney friends who are on both sides of the "law") think the DA charged to keep the peace; charges will be reduced eventually and DA will hope for a plea. Or if not, he has a growing legal defense fund, so I am not sure he would take a plea in the first place and just fight it out instead.

HeyEng is right in one way here for sure. I had a co-worker at the OSBI that was called for jury duty. When they went in for deliberations, the other jurors had NO IDEA that possession of drugs with intent to distribute was a "higher charge" than simple possession. She was shocked to see how ignorant the "peers" were as to what laws had higher sentence possibilities.

 

[Truckdriver]

Devils Advocate:

I don't think there's a real defense for Kyle here based on one main factor.

He traveled from another state into a known area of rioting, armed and presumably with intent. In just about any state, you would lose on the idea that you simply cannot claim self defense when you go looking for trouble. He was "defending" himself after "poking the bear". Thats not self defense.

I don't see this ending well for Kyle, based on that one simple issue.

With Anti-Fa using that same tactic, and getting away with it, when those with "good intentions" try to use that tactic, today's attorneys and legal system will use that as a way to express its "unbiased" enforcement by standing this kid up and stating "he did just what the rioters in most other cities did. He traveled into a riot zone with intent to commit crime, regardless of of intent to protect instead of riot. He went looking for trouble and found it. Thats not self defense"

End Devils Advocate mode

All the above being said, I hope the justice system finds him not guilty, but I doubt they will

 

[Dumpstick]

BLM will be the death of this nation

That is the design of t?he movement. It's simply another cover for Marxist revolutionaries.

BTW, isn't advocation of armed overthrow of the Govt some sort of crime ? Sedition comes to mind.

 

[Poke78]

Devils Advocate:

I don't think there's a real defense for Kyle here based on one main factor.

He traveled from another state into a known area of rioting, armed and presumably with intent. In just about any state, you would lose on the idea that you simply cannot claim self defense when you go looking for trouble. He was "defending" himself after "poking the bear". Thats not self defense.

I don't see this ending well for Kyle, based on that one simple issue.

With Anti-Fa using that same tactic, and getting away with it, when those with "good intentions" try to use that tactic, today's attorneys and legal system will use that as a way to express its "unbiased" enforcement by standing this kid up and stating "he did just what the rioters in most other cities did. He traveled into a riot zone with intent to commit crime, regardless of of intent to protect instead of riot. He went looking for trouble and found it. Thats not self defense"

End Devils Advocate mode

All the above being said, I hope the justice system finds him not guilty, but I doubt they will

I get your basic point in Devil’s Advocate mode as the likely approach to the case by prosecutors. I believe the entry of Lin Wood as Kyle’s pro bono attorney who is also amassing support funds through tax-deductible donations shifts the power away from the prosecution and their accomplices in the leftist press. It will certainly make for lots of interesting conversation.

 

[tRidiot]

I think the bottom line will come down to the fact he was a 17 y/o armed and open carrying. In OK, that is illegal and he wouldn't be able to mount an affirmative defense predicated on his right to be where he was. He was already committing a felony, and I think he's going to get long hard time.