Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Few_Butterscotch954 t1_j4qcn34 wrote

Reply to comment by sugarintheboots in Roseland, N.J. mayor: Resident fired shot at would-be car thief inside his home by dhskiskdferh

NJ's "Duty to retreat" law applies outside of one's home. Even though "castle doctrine" does not exist in NJ there is no still no requirement to retreat within one's home when faced with an imminent threat. "Duty to retreat" is a requirement outside of one's home and means that an individual must attempt to avoid, diffuse, or escape before using "force" within a potential "self-defense" scenario.

11

dhskiskdferh OP t1_j4qxwaw wrote

While there isn’t a duty to retreat, you are not authorized to use deadly force unless your life is in danger. Also you are to give warnings to the intruder and demand they leave before firing.

It seems like the homeowner did not do that. Personally, I don’t think a jury is going to scrutinize the extent to which you tried to reason with an intruder as much as the law seems to instruct though

9

garbagiodagr8 t1_j4rulu0 wrote

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

Warnings for breaking into my home where my children sleep? Im good.

7

vey323 t1_j4s0tp0 wrote

There is no statutory requirement in NJ to warn an intruder or give them means of escape.

1

dhskiskdferh OP t1_j4s6x88 wrote

There is for the former but not the latter

1

vey323 t1_j4s7nyw wrote

No, there is not.

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2016/title-2c/section-2c-3-4/

The only part of the statute that mentions anything akin to a warning is the section that deals with establishing what a "reasonable belief" is. As I just responded to someone else regarding this, I'll just copy pasta:

(2)A reasonable belief exists when the actor, to protect himself or a third person, was in his own dwelling at the time of the offense or was privileged to be thereon and the encounter between the actor and intruder was sudden and unexpected, compelling the actor to act instantly and:

(a)The actor reasonably believed that the intruder would inflict personal injury upon the actor or others in the dwelling; OR

b)The actor demanded that the intruder disarm, surrender or withdraw, and the intruder refused to do so.

The emphasis on OR is mine, because you don't need both conditions to be fulfilled to have a reasonable belief - it's one or the other. If someone breaks into your home, and you tell them to leave, and they refuse, then that provides the reasonable belief that they intend to cause serious injury or death to you or others.

1

dhskiskdferh OP t1_j4s7sg9 wrote

You’re proving everyone else’s point thank you

1

Few_Butterscotch954 t1_j4r7rbd wrote

Correct, a reasonable fear of one's life and a verbal warning is required inside of one's own home.

2

flyinfalkin t1_j4r937q wrote

Didn't realize the verbal warning piece, but in all honestly, if someone is in my home, with two small children, I'm going to fear for their and my life. I would also say that giving verbal warning gives the intruder a chance to act first before I do and I find that odd.

4

dhskiskdferh OP t1_j4rxnvz wrote

I think most agree, and therefore a jury would agree. Also probably why he was not charged

1

vey323 t1_j4s0q85 wrote

The use of deadly force in NJ requires reasonable belief and an imminent need that such force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to yourself or others; outside the home you have a duty to retreat if you can safely do so, but inside the home there is no such duty. There is NO requirement to give warning to an intruder - if they are in your home or attempting to enter, "a person may stand in the threshold of their home and prevent an assailant from entering by any means. A home owner my use force – including deadly force – upon an intruder if the home owner believes that force is immediately necessary to protect themselves or others in the home".

This is direct from the statute and the NJ Attorney General's Use of Force Policy

1

Few_Butterscotch954 t1_j4s3wtr wrote

just a second, i found this https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2016/title-2c/section-2c-3-4/

b)The actor demanded that the intruder disarm, surrender or withdraw, and the intruder refused to do so.

2

vey323 t1_j4s611c wrote

That section denotes what is required for "reasonable belief" for use of deadly force, not that you are required to give a warning.

>(2)A reasonable belief exists when the actor, to protect himself or a third person, was in his own dwelling at the time of the offense or was privileged to be thereon and the encounter between the actor and intruder was sudden and unexpected, compelling the actor to act instantly and:
>
>(a)The actor reasonably believed that the intruder would inflict personal injury upon the actor or others in the dwelling; OR
>
>b)The actor demanded that the intruder disarm, surrender or withdraw, and the intruder refused to do so.

The emphasis on OR is mine, because you don't need both conditions to be fulfilled to have a reasonable belief - it's one or the other. If someone breaks into your home, and you tell them to leave, and they refuse, then that provides the reasonable belief that they intend to cause serious injury or death to you or others.

1

flyinfalkin t1_j4s23k7 wrote

Thank you for finding this. I thought I had read something like this before.

1

dhskiskdferh OP t1_j4s75l2 wrote

What part? You are mixing your commentary with the guidance

1

sugarintheboots t1_j4qd050 wrote

Good to know. I had been told differently by police.

7

MasterXanthan t1_j4ryzpp wrote

While the police enforce the law, they don't seem to have a good grasp on the law. Lawyers have a much better understanding of the law.

3

MasterXanthan t1_j4rytru wrote

Duty to retreat doesn't sound that good. What if escaping is the wrong choice that ends up getting the victim killed vs. the victim fighting back if the victim is able to fight back?

1