Wyoming’s “Stand Your Ground” law says you don’t have to run from a confrontation before defending yourself. That is what Rihanna Kelver and her counsel are asking a Laramie judge to consider as they seek protection from prosecution in a felony case stemming from a confrontation outside the Crowbar.
This whole thing sounds stupid to me because they’re arguing over whether deadly force was warranted or not. She never actually shot the guy so there was no deadly force! The tl;dr version is:
The guy physically assaulted her. Sure we can argue if a shove with no weapons is enough to warrant being shot to death, but that’s not what happened so who cares. Sounds like she did absolutely nothing wrong unless she wasn’t allowed to have the gun or something.
But she’s not being charged with use of deadly force. She’s being charged with aggravated assault, which is threatening the use of deadly force, i.e. brandishing.
The stand your ground defense might not hold up because she approached him, then drew the gun after he pushed her. He wasn’t a threat until she put herself in a situation where he could be.
I’m sure a jury would return not guilty, but she didn’t do her defense any favors. If someone is shouting insults from a distance, you should walk away or at least not approach. If they follow you, then brandishing is more justified.
Ah I missed that detail, thanks for the clarification. I disagree about the approaching part, anyone can approach anyone in public. Approaching isn’t an aggressive action, especially not like pushing someone is. He said words, she got closer and said words, he got physical, she almost got physical back. I hope she beats the rap.
Witnesses say she had her hand at her hip like she was ready to draw a weapon as she approached. She also drew as they were leaving (the push was pushing her out of the way).
And while approaching someone isn’t inherently an aggressive action, insulting someone is. Approaching a stranger who is insulting you is escalating things by confronting them.
She also didn’t do herself any favors by claiming she pulled a non-existent knife.
But let’s swap the genders here, like someone else in the thread said. If a group of black women started calling a white guy a racist, then he went out of his way to confront them about it and got shoved, would we be cool with him pulling a gun? Would we be saying he was just standing his ground?
I didn’t see anything saying that she had her hand on her hip ready to draw, but even if true, so what.
I don’t live in a state with these kind of gun laws, but in her state them’s the rules. Personally I think getting physical with someone in any way is a big escalation, it’s literally a use of force. Force should be reasonably appropriate and somewhat equal, i.e. you don’t get to shoot someone for bumping into you at the store (or shoot someone who is not or is no longer a threat, possibly like this situation). You might say the guy had no weapons and simply pushed her, but the fact remains that she returned his force with none. It could have been the case that she got pushed over and then the guy goes to kick or stomp her in which case I think shooting is appropriate. I think the brandishing charge is probably bullshit, because it doesn’t seem like she was waving around the gun to intimidate or threaten someone. It sounds like she took out the gun to use it during a physical altercation and then didn’t when she realized it was not necessary.
No need to swap genders or substitute ideologically different people, I’m cool with a legally-carried gun being pulled during a defensive physical fight every time. You said that insulting someone is an inherently aggressive action, and sure I’ll mostly agree, but the big difference is that it’s legal. Insults are fist amendment protected speech most of the time, pushing someone is battery.
And it appears that Wyoming considers approaching someone who has had words with you is an escalation.
Brandishing a weapon is… I don’t konw if it’s a use of force or some other classification, but there are laws against that.
It sounds to me that the court will consider all the arguments and come to whatever conclusion the law specifies. Or maybe it won’t and the law should be changed, or… dunno. Just responding to two minor things you said that I thought required minor replies. :)
Yeah, this is a real good point. She is almost certainly going to be found at fault here. Heckling does not justify a reply with a threat of deadly force. She was not in fear of her life or grievous bodily harm, which is what you need to justify threats of deadly force.
Except the threat of deadly force was not in reply to the heckling, but the actual assault of him pushing her onto the ground. Assuming these were anti trans insults I fully understand being fearful for your life after that.
Battery*
In most jurisdictions assault is the threat of violence and battery is the actions.
But witnesses say she approached with her hand at her hip, as if ready to draw a gun. If true, that means she had already determined she was in danger by approaching.
In that case, assuming the guy who shoved her saw the hand position, it could be argued by the prosecutors that the push was in self defense. She was allegedly pushed out of the way as they were leaving, then pulled a gun.
She also lied and said she pulled a knife, which seriously danages the credibility of her version.