We don't know all of the details (and in some respects, neither does
law enforcement), but based on what I've seen in a couple of news
articles, it sounds like this is a "justifiable taking of life"
pursuant to Minnesota Statute Β§609.065:
| 609.065 JUSTIFIABLE TAKING OF LIFE.
|
| The intentional taking of the life of another is not authorized by
section
| 609.06, except when necessary in resisting or preventing an offense
which
| the actor reasonably believes exposes the actor or another to great
bodily
| harm or death, or preventing the commission of a felony in the
actor's place
| of abode.
We all know that the Midtown Greenway has been a dangerous place at
night because of the seclusion, darkness, absence of escape routes and
lack of policing. There's not much that the community and law
enforcement can do with limited resources, so for many people the
decision becomes either not using the Greenway or continuing to enjoy
the great resource and transit corridor that the Greenway is -- but
while carrying a defensive weapon.
I absolutely disagree with Bill that "carrying a knife or other weapon
to defend yourself in a dangerous place could be considered
premeditation" for three reasons. First, premeditated murder
(somewhat of a misnomer, but an element of first degree murder)
requires the "intent to effect the death of of...another" (MS
Β§609.185). Whether a person is carrying a knife, OC spray or a
firearm, it would be very difficult to prove that the person defending
themselves intended to kill unless there was other information
suggesting that. Second, police for the most part RESPOND to violent
crime and cannot possibly do anything to prevent it. Community Crime
Prevention, block clubs and e-mail alerts will not stop someone from
attacking you, so it becomes prudent for one traveling in a dangerous
area to take action to protect themselves if they wish to do so. This
could be as simple as the biker interviewed by WCCO strategically
carrying her U-lock to be used as a defensive weapon if need be.
Third, this is the reason we have laws like the "Justifiable Taking of
Life" statute and the Minnesota Citizens' Personal Protection Act --
because our policymakers realize that however horrible death is, there
are some cases where it's the only option and last resort. We deserve
to be able to defend ourselves against violence that jeopardizes our
lives, in my opinion.
The Star Tribune reports that Whirlwind Horse and Jackson "ran up
behind the man, who feared for his safety and took a knife out of his
pocket; the teenagers started to hit the man, who stabbed Jackson once
in the stomach...," and after that, "Jackson and Whirlwind Horse
chased the man, but he made it to Hiawatha Avenue and called 911...and
flagged down police." Also, Whirlwind Horse was charged with
attempted robbery and admitted to police that he and Jackson had
planned to "find someone to beat up and rob," according to MPR.
Based on everything reported, PW was walking alone when he heard
footsteps and started walking faster. On the Greenway, depending on
the exact location, you have two options: forward or backward. That
doesn't give PW much of a chance for escape. Jackson caught up to him
and punched him in the head. PW took out his knife but it sounded
like he took anywhere from one to two punches and didn't use the knife
until another punch was about to occur. I think this satisfies the
requirement that PW tried to escape, and I think a punch to the head
qualifies as someone attempting to cause "great bodily harm or death,"
or at least PW fearing that. The other question is PW's size and
physical ability. But with two attackers, PW could have easily felt
like the threat could overcome him.
PW stabbed once and ran away, yet the attackers continued to chase
him. He got to Hiawatha and called 911. PW did his due diligence by
trying to escape, stabbing only once in an attempt to to stop the
threat and not more, and immediately calling police. When Jackson's
partner in crime admits that they were going to "find someone to beat
up and rob," I think that's a solid case for PW not to be charged.
I wonder if PW's knife was legal -- it must not have been a switch
blade (MS Β§609.66) and must have had a blade under four inches
(Minneapolis Ord. Β§393.10(f)). I could see him getting charged there
simply as a technicality.
I haven't looked at the court records and I'm waiting for the police
report, but I'd also really like to hear the 911 call to see if PW
asks for medical attention for Jackson and to hear what he said in his
call -- that will most definitely be assessed by prosecutors. As far
as I'm concerned, death in any form is sad to see and it's a big
burden on the community, but based on what has been reported I feel
that this is justifiable and that Hennepin County Attorney Mike
Freeman should not charge PW with anything. It sounds like police and
investigators recognized PW's predicament and that's why we don't have
his full name.
To put this into perspective, how is the officer that shot the Fort
Hood shooter a hero, but there are questions with this case? Is it
only acceptable to use deadly, defensive force when you're a peace
officer or protecting a mass group of people, or at what point is it
no longer questionable?
Going forward, we NEED to address the crime that occurs on the Midtown
Greenway so its users don't have to go through this. Educators,
parents, law enforcement and the community has the responsibility to
make sure more kids don't have to die from a mistake, ignorance, poor
parenting, or whatever the cause may be -- but nobody has the
answers. I feel for everyone involved and feel strongly that
prosecuting the victim would be a mistake.
Tony Webster
Loring Park