Us V. Peterson Case Summary
Bria Payton
Case Brief: United States v. Peterson, 483 F.2d 1222 (1973)
Issue: Is self-defense available for a justifiable homicide case?
Facts: The victim, Charles Keitt, drove to an alley way to obtain windshield wipers off the defendant’s car, Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson observed the victim, Mr. Keitt, doing this and confronted him with an altercation. The victim went back to his car and the defendant, Mr. Peterson, returned inside his home. The victim was about to leave, but because the defendant provoked the situation by bringing a pistol out his home, he came out his car with a wrench. Mr. Peterson urged the victim that if he moved, then he would shoot him. The victim stepped out from his car and the defendant, Mr. Peterson, shot him in …show more content…
United States, the defendant got into an argument with a group of his friends, which led the altercation into the streets. He left and went to his apartment, which was nearby, loaded a pistol and returned. One of the friends made a comment that insulted the defendant, so he shot a round into the ground. The friends started approaching him, so he shot and killed two, while injuring a third. Just like Peterson, the defendant provoked the situation by returning with a gun and killing the non-aggressors.
Analysis/Reasoning: The defendant couldn’t justify using self-defense because evidence shows that he was the aggressor in the situation. He is the reason that the situation escalated to the point where it did.
Dissent: No person should be charged with justifiable homicide if they are the aggressor in the situation. The victim in the situation should be the aggressor in order for it to be considered justifiable homicide.
Personal Reflections: I personally think the judge called the correct charged, instead of calling it justifiable homicide. If he saw that the defendant was stealing his windshield wipers, he should have called the police. Bringing a pistol into the situation was uncalled for and it should have no led to the death of the victim. He was clearly trying to leave the scene, once he was
Case Brief: United States v. Peterson, 483 F.2d 1222 (1973)
Issue: Is self-defense available for a justifiable homicide case?
Facts: The victim, Charles Keitt, drove to an alley way to obtain windshield wipers off the defendant’s car, Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson observed the victim, Mr. Keitt, doing this and confronted him with an altercation. The victim went back to his car and the defendant, Mr. Peterson, returned inside his home. The victim was about to leave, but because the defendant provoked the situation by bringing a pistol out his home, he came out his car with a wrench. Mr. Peterson urged the victim that if he moved, then he would shoot him. The victim stepped out from his car and the defendant, Mr. Peterson, shot him in …show more content…
United States, the defendant got into an argument with a group of his friends, which led the altercation into the streets. He left and went to his apartment, which was nearby, loaded a pistol and returned. One of the friends made a comment that insulted the defendant, so he shot a round into the ground. The friends started approaching him, so he shot and killed two, while injuring a third. Just like Peterson, the defendant provoked the situation by returning with a gun and killing the non-aggressors.
Analysis/Reasoning: The defendant couldn’t justify using self-defense because evidence shows that he was the aggressor in the situation. He is the reason that the situation escalated to the point where it did.
Dissent: No person should be charged with justifiable homicide if they are the aggressor in the situation. The victim in the situation should be the aggressor in order for it to be considered justifiable homicide.
Personal Reflections: I personally think the judge called the correct charged, instead of calling it justifiable homicide. If he saw that the defendant was stealing his windshield wipers, he should have called the police. Bringing a pistol into the situation was uncalled for and it should have no led to the death of the victim. He was clearly trying to leave the scene, once he was