Fence question

Hi Chris

I lifted this question from another thread,i'd be interested to hear your take on it.

If I or anyone has trained the fence and uses it does that not make guilty through premeditated decission to take deceptive action through pretending to be submissive to gain a knockout before being attacked.
After all said and done the law can be an ass.
Or does the ''victim'' pretend to be untrained in court?
thanks.

cheers mate,

Ade

Just butting in here Chris sorry, but I think it's too situational dependent to give a blanket response.

Just a simple opinion.

Some Law Enforcement general guidelines maybe?

hey all,

I take your point Mr.N but there are some hard and fast rules you can rely on when pleading self defence.

e.g. Self defence is an absolute defense in law. I.e. Prove you acted in self defence and you prove your innocence.

you ARE allowed to strike preemptively to protect yourself, to protect others, to protect your property and to protect the property of others. You don't have to wait for the threat to become a physical attack.

you MUST believe that a threat is present and about to manifest into action

your action in response to that threat MUST be reasonable. I.e. Would a reasonable man in the street have done what you did?

pretty black and white.

now, if we ask does using the fence make someone guilty in some way because you are taking some deceptive action before throwing the preemptive shot then the point is irrelevant. What invalidates the defence of self defence is lack of threat and or lack of reasonable action. If the threat exists it is irrelevant whether I trick the threatening party or not. If the threat does not exist its irrelevant whether I trick the threatening party or not. The legality of my action will be decided on other criteria.

I would agree with Chris. That said, sometimes the witnesses(es) would be a good defense in the case, or they can be a nightmare working from the opposite course.