SELF-DEFENSE in Washington State is legal if it’s proportional to the threat. The victim, Powell, was in the right to defend himself and the court agrees. He lived and is out of the hospital. Timm is the only one in legal trouble in this situation. www.kiro7.com/news/local/i...
Powell could defend himself, but not with deadly force in response to a theft. In his favor is that he's disabled. This would give him justification to use more force. What would have negated that is him going towards Timm. People in fear retreat, they don't advance. /1
The court didn't agree. The prosecutor made a charging decision. A perfectly reasonable decision IMO. I was just saying that if Timm had never pulled a gun & shot the veteran, the veteran MIGHT have found himself in some problems for brandishing a deadly weapon in response to a theft. /2
We could go down the rabbit hole with what if’s. It doesn’t change the facts: “King County prosecutors have charged him (Timm) with first-degree assault, a Class A felony that carries the potential for life in prison. His bail has been set at $750,000.”
No, it doesn't change the facts. I just don't want people to think it's reasonable or legal in the state of Washington to use or threaten deadly force in response to a theft. That said, I think we can both agree that Timm should be in prison for a very long time.
Washington state law typically doesn't allow deadly force or threat of deadly force in response to a larceny. /n
Nothing good happens when guns are drawn.