WEBVTT - 3-6-26 Sloan with Jason Phillabaum

0:00:00.120 --> 0:00:02.480
<v Speaker 1>Do you want to be an American idiot?

0:00:03.160 --> 0:00:05.640
<v Speaker 2>It's got flown on seven hundred ww you get the

0:00:05.680 --> 0:00:07.280
<v Speaker 2>important stuff, by the way, then we have the fun

0:00:07.320 --> 0:00:09.640
<v Speaker 2>stuff on this Friday morning when we lose our sleep.

0:00:09.680 --> 0:00:14.000
<v Speaker 2>My god, can someone who illegally possessed a weapon invoke

0:00:14.160 --> 0:00:15.040
<v Speaker 2>self defense?

0:00:15.600 --> 0:00:17.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah? But here's a twist.

0:00:17.920 --> 0:00:20.560
<v Speaker 2>Two felons shooting at one another are now each claiming

0:00:20.600 --> 0:00:23.560
<v Speaker 2>self defense in the Riverfront Live shooting last weekend, So

0:00:23.640 --> 0:00:24.960
<v Speaker 2>that is three in a row if you include the

0:00:25.000 --> 0:00:27.400
<v Speaker 2>Fountain Square shooter. Do we have a trend here where

0:00:27.920 --> 0:00:30.920
<v Speaker 2>thugs and criminals and gangbangers can shoot each other with

0:00:30.960 --> 0:00:34.320
<v Speaker 2>impunity in our streets right around us, put us in danger.

0:00:34.360 --> 0:00:38.519
<v Speaker 2>In the case of the nine people injured at Riverfront Live,

0:00:38.520 --> 0:00:41.279
<v Speaker 2>I would say that's a hell yes, and then say, oh,

0:00:41.320 --> 0:00:43.960
<v Speaker 2>I was just defending myself. If you're a street criminal

0:00:44.159 --> 0:00:46.120
<v Speaker 2>and you in the act of we had another felony

0:00:46.159 --> 0:00:48.839
<v Speaker 2>shoot at someone because of some stupid street beef, how

0:00:48.880 --> 0:00:51.839
<v Speaker 2>the hell can you claim self defense? And this is

0:00:51.880 --> 0:00:55.120
<v Speaker 2>a disturbing new trend is a question the legal pitfalls

0:00:55.160 --> 0:00:57.720
<v Speaker 2>and such. Jason Philbaum will break us down force of course,

0:00:57.760 --> 0:01:01.240
<v Speaker 2>extraordinary defense attorney, former secutor and Butler County.

0:01:01.280 --> 0:01:04.200
<v Speaker 1>Jason, welcome back. How are you there? We go, Jason,

0:01:04.280 --> 0:01:04.560
<v Speaker 1>You're there?

0:01:05.200 --> 0:01:05.440
<v Speaker 3>Okay?

0:01:05.480 --> 0:01:06.440
<v Speaker 1>I got I gotcha?

0:01:06.480 --> 0:01:06.680
<v Speaker 3>Good?

0:01:08.680 --> 0:01:10.440
<v Speaker 2>Before we begin on this one, is there anyway we

0:01:10.560 --> 0:01:13.319
<v Speaker 2>who can we sue, file and litigate and take to

0:01:13.400 --> 0:01:16.520
<v Speaker 2>court regarding this loss of one hour on Sunday? Is

0:01:16.560 --> 0:01:18.840
<v Speaker 2>there anything could be done legally about the time change?

0:01:19.600 --> 0:01:21.720
<v Speaker 3>I thought Elon Musk was supposed to take care of that.

0:01:22.280 --> 0:01:23.480
<v Speaker 2>I think I think he was.

0:01:23.600 --> 0:01:27.839
<v Speaker 3>Probably we wouldn't. Yeah, supposedly it's supposed to save money.

0:01:27.880 --> 0:01:30.319
<v Speaker 3>And then I guess heart attacks go up with the

0:01:30.400 --> 0:01:33.399
<v Speaker 3>day after. I mean, like that's just stops as time change.

0:01:33.480 --> 0:01:36.120
<v Speaker 3>But I wish I knew. I wish I knew.

0:01:36.880 --> 0:01:39.840
<v Speaker 2>All right, I'm a much serious, serious note here. So

0:01:39.920 --> 0:01:43.360
<v Speaker 2>we had the March first mass shooting Riverfront Live nine wounded,

0:01:43.800 --> 0:01:44.880
<v Speaker 2>eight hundred plus people.

0:01:44.920 --> 0:01:45.160
<v Speaker 3>There.

0:01:45.480 --> 0:01:49.720
<v Speaker 2>You had Freniy Cobb and Derek Long. One has just

0:01:49.720 --> 0:01:51.960
<v Speaker 2>gotten out of prison and picks up a gun and

0:01:51.960 --> 0:01:54.680
<v Speaker 2>sees this guy's got a gun his waistband. I don't

0:01:54.680 --> 0:01:57.000
<v Speaker 2>know how he gets the security. That's another civil suit.

0:01:57.000 --> 0:01:58.920
<v Speaker 2>I'm sure that's waiting to happen, as well as criminal suit.

0:01:59.000 --> 0:02:02.760
<v Speaker 2>But nonetheless, they start a shootout. Cobb had a long

0:02:02.800 --> 0:02:05.960
<v Speaker 2>standing grudge against mister Long. They're both convicted felons, both

0:02:06.000 --> 0:02:09.880
<v Speaker 2>prohibited from possessing firearms. It's weapons under disability. They're facing

0:02:09.880 --> 0:02:13.239
<v Speaker 2>felonious assault charges in state court and federal charges for

0:02:13.360 --> 0:02:15.880
<v Speaker 2>legally possessing a fireman's felons. That'll come later on, But

0:02:16.360 --> 0:02:19.320
<v Speaker 2>the key legal tension here is you've got two thugs

0:02:19.320 --> 0:02:21.040
<v Speaker 2>that are shooting it out in a place of little people,

0:02:21.080 --> 0:02:24.720
<v Speaker 2>with no regard to the safety of complete innocent bystanders.

0:02:25.639 --> 0:02:28.040
<v Speaker 2>And now they're both claiming self defense. This feels like

0:02:28.120 --> 0:02:30.600
<v Speaker 2>a like almost like a legal loophole to me, Jason,

0:02:30.639 --> 0:02:33.000
<v Speaker 2>because we just saw this happen with the Fountain Square shooting.

0:02:34.160 --> 0:02:36.399
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and I think what you're seeing in this case.

0:02:36.440 --> 0:02:39.080
<v Speaker 3>And first of all, you got shooter one because and

0:02:39.120 --> 0:02:42.320
<v Speaker 3>shooter two. So shooter one walks into this club seize

0:02:42.360 --> 0:02:46.440
<v Speaker 3>his mortal enemy. That alone does not give rise to

0:02:46.760 --> 0:02:49.240
<v Speaker 3>self defense. So you have to be in great bodily

0:02:49.320 --> 0:02:52.520
<v Speaker 3>thereat fear of great bodily harm or death, and so

0:02:52.680 --> 0:02:56.160
<v Speaker 3>just seeing your enemy across the bar is not enough

0:02:56.200 --> 0:02:58.840
<v Speaker 3>to get to that level. So he pulls out his

0:02:58.919 --> 0:03:02.040
<v Speaker 3>gun and starts by firing and ends up hitting Shooter two.

0:03:02.560 --> 0:03:05.639
<v Speaker 3>So Shooter two gets hipped and then he pulls his

0:03:05.680 --> 0:03:09.040
<v Speaker 3>gun out and just starts firing indiscriminately. And I think

0:03:08.760 --> 0:03:10.919
<v Speaker 3>that's that's where you kind of have to break it down.

0:03:11.280 --> 0:03:14.760
<v Speaker 3>If Shooter two was shot, I think he does have

0:03:14.880 --> 0:03:18.040
<v Speaker 3>the right to self defense at that moment. So you

0:03:18.520 --> 0:03:22.240
<v Speaker 3>are being shot, you're in fear of great bodily harm

0:03:22.360 --> 0:03:25.160
<v Speaker 3>or death, so you pull out your firearm and you

0:03:25.240 --> 0:03:30.880
<v Speaker 3>fire back. That action right in that moment is likely justified.

0:03:31.240 --> 0:03:34.480
<v Speaker 3>The problem he has is he shouldn't have a gun,

0:03:34.920 --> 0:03:39.040
<v Speaker 3>so he felt guilty of weapons while under disability when

0:03:39.080 --> 0:03:41.000
<v Speaker 3>he left the home, when he went into the bar,

0:03:41.560 --> 0:03:44.440
<v Speaker 3>and so on. At the moment, you know, I think

0:03:44.440 --> 0:03:47.440
<v Speaker 3>there's an legal argument that you can probably grab a

0:03:47.480 --> 0:03:50.800
<v Speaker 3>gun and defend yourself. But it'd be like if I'm

0:03:50.800 --> 0:03:53.960
<v Speaker 3>a fellon and you're my buddy carrying and someone shooting

0:03:53.960 --> 0:03:55.960
<v Speaker 3>at us, and I grab your gun and fire back,

0:03:56.720 --> 0:03:59.800
<v Speaker 3>I probably can get out of a weapons wunder disability charge,

0:04:00.040 --> 0:04:02.160
<v Speaker 3>But the fact I carried it and left home with it,

0:04:02.360 --> 0:04:06.200
<v Speaker 3>I think he's you know, he might get himself a

0:04:06.440 --> 0:04:09.960
<v Speaker 3>not guilty on the blowing the assault a shooter rue,

0:04:10.160 --> 0:04:12.080
<v Speaker 3>but I don't see him getting it. Not guilty on

0:04:12.160 --> 0:04:13.680
<v Speaker 3>the weapons wonder, it's still got it.

0:04:13.760 --> 0:04:15.960
<v Speaker 2>So Jerry believes long generally fear for his life. They

0:04:16.000 --> 0:04:19.720
<v Speaker 2>can acquit him on followence assault, even while federal prosecutors

0:04:19.760 --> 0:04:22.000
<v Speaker 2>can get him on weapons under disability.

0:04:22.000 --> 0:04:24.159
<v Speaker 1>It's it's separate charge, yes.

0:04:24.360 --> 0:04:26.080
<v Speaker 3>And the other thing you've got to think about too,

0:04:26.200 --> 0:04:29.760
<v Speaker 3>which is you have it when you're exercising your right

0:04:29.880 --> 0:04:32.840
<v Speaker 3>to self defense, you still have a duty to be

0:04:32.960 --> 0:04:36.960
<v Speaker 3>reasonable and that's in the statute as well. So the

0:04:37.040 --> 0:04:40.520
<v Speaker 3>fact that he fired indiscriminately into a crowd could rise

0:04:40.640 --> 0:04:43.239
<v Speaker 3>to the level of other charges. You know, if someone

0:04:43.360 --> 0:04:46.400
<v Speaker 3>were to die, you could be charged with involuntary manslaughter

0:04:46.880 --> 0:04:51.360
<v Speaker 3>or reckless homicide. If someone you know is just seriously injured,

0:04:51.680 --> 0:04:54.640
<v Speaker 3>then you're looking at potentially reckless assault, you know. So

0:04:55.080 --> 0:04:57.520
<v Speaker 3>you know, think about if you and I are fighting

0:04:57.560 --> 0:04:59.760
<v Speaker 3>and you pull out your gun and then I pull

0:04:59.800 --> 0:05:03.320
<v Speaker 3>out mine. I'm acting in self defense, I fire and

0:05:03.400 --> 0:05:06.400
<v Speaker 3>it either goes through you or just misses you and

0:05:06.520 --> 0:05:10.360
<v Speaker 3>hit some kid behind you. There's some liability there, and

0:05:10.480 --> 0:05:12.560
<v Speaker 3>I think, you know, it's sort of like the example

0:05:12.640 --> 0:05:16.080
<v Speaker 3>of a Breonna Taylor in Louisville where that officer on

0:05:16.160 --> 0:05:19.280
<v Speaker 3>the outside just started firing it the right, you know,

0:05:19.400 --> 0:05:23.400
<v Speaker 3>the applying that. Yeah, that that action was seemed to

0:05:23.480 --> 0:05:27.040
<v Speaker 3>be criminal, and he got charged. So I think, you know,

0:05:27.080 --> 0:05:30.040
<v Speaker 3>if you have a situation where you fire one shot

0:05:30.120 --> 0:05:32.320
<v Speaker 3>and it goes through the bad guy and hit someone

0:05:32.360 --> 0:05:35.080
<v Speaker 3>behind there, I'm guessing the jury might give you a

0:05:35.160 --> 0:05:38.280
<v Speaker 3>path with you being reasonable. But if you just you know,

0:05:38.440 --> 0:05:42.240
<v Speaker 3>have a you know, clip of fifteen bullets and you're

0:05:42.320 --> 0:05:45.280
<v Speaker 3>just firing, you know, in the direction of the guy

0:05:45.400 --> 0:05:47.840
<v Speaker 3>that shot you, and then you know, eight people get hit,

0:05:48.360 --> 0:05:50.680
<v Speaker 3>I'm not sure a jury would find your actions to

0:05:50.760 --> 0:05:52.880
<v Speaker 3>be reasonable there. So that's another thing you have to

0:05:52.920 --> 0:05:53.760
<v Speaker 3>look at in this case.

0:05:53.920 --> 0:05:58.679
<v Speaker 2>Okay, Staniyar grind as a wrinkler, correct, because it does apply.

0:05:58.800 --> 0:06:02.440
<v Speaker 2>It's a constitutional aspect of this thing. But the fact

0:06:02.480 --> 0:06:05.440
<v Speaker 2>that both men were committing felony crimes by carrying guns

0:06:05.480 --> 0:06:06.800
<v Speaker 2>does that change that analysis?

0:06:06.800 --> 0:06:07.480
<v Speaker 1>Does that change that?

0:06:08.920 --> 0:06:11.520
<v Speaker 3>Yeah? I think it does. You have to look at

0:06:11.560 --> 0:06:15.000
<v Speaker 3>the fact that they walk out of their house already

0:06:15.040 --> 0:06:18.360
<v Speaker 3>committing a felony and so that's another thing to look

0:06:18.400 --> 0:06:20.640
<v Speaker 3>at too, which is, you know, there's an argument of

0:06:21.040 --> 0:06:23.960
<v Speaker 3>is it a felony murder charge? Because they're committing a

0:06:24.040 --> 0:06:27.480
<v Speaker 3>felony by carrying a firearm, and then you know people

0:06:27.520 --> 0:06:31.599
<v Speaker 3>are are dead because of it. There's maybe approximate cause

0:06:31.640 --> 0:06:34.680
<v Speaker 3>there that a jury will have to look through as

0:06:34.720 --> 0:06:38.479
<v Speaker 3>whether or not it's an involuntary manslaughter or a felony murder.

0:06:38.600 --> 0:06:40.559
<v Speaker 3>But at the end of the day, they're they're carrying

0:06:40.600 --> 0:06:43.599
<v Speaker 3>a firearm when no, they can't. Yeah, so that already

0:06:44.040 --> 0:06:47.840
<v Speaker 3>shows that there's some some criminal conduct there. And so

0:06:48.040 --> 0:06:50.840
<v Speaker 3>if you know, with a Fountain Square shooter, I think

0:06:50.880 --> 0:06:53.240
<v Speaker 3>it seemed pretty clear the guy just pulled out a gun,

0:06:53.360 --> 0:06:56.320
<v Speaker 3>fired and then video evidence shows him firing back and

0:06:56.440 --> 0:07:00.960
<v Speaker 3>being reasonable in that regard. And so that situation here

0:07:01.080 --> 0:07:03.480
<v Speaker 3>where these guys just look across the room and then

0:07:03.680 --> 0:07:06.440
<v Speaker 3>you know it's it's you know, like the wild West.

0:07:06.480 --> 0:07:08.480
<v Speaker 3>They just pull their guns and start shooting at each other.

0:07:08.680 --> 0:07:10.800
<v Speaker 3>I'm not sure jury's going to find their actions to

0:07:10.880 --> 0:07:14.480
<v Speaker 3>be reasonable. And you know, the standard ground just means

0:07:14.800 --> 0:07:16.840
<v Speaker 3>you don't have to be you don't have to retreat

0:07:17.080 --> 0:07:21.360
<v Speaker 3>before you use your your response beforce, but it's still

0:07:21.480 --> 0:07:24.440
<v Speaker 3>have to be reasonable. You can't just start blindly shooting

0:07:24.520 --> 0:07:27.400
<v Speaker 3>into a like like a house like that. Breonna Taylor

0:07:27.640 --> 0:07:28.440
<v Speaker 3>officer did.

0:07:28.520 --> 0:07:31.360
<v Speaker 2>Defense attorney Jason Philibamon with Sloane here on seven hundred

0:07:31.480 --> 0:07:35.280
<v Speaker 2>WYLW involving going back to the Riverfront live shootings volviously

0:07:35.320 --> 0:07:39.000
<v Speaker 2>two subjects that shot at each other and nine people

0:07:39.040 --> 0:07:41.640
<v Speaker 2>and some people got hit, and they were both of

0:07:41.680 --> 0:07:46.160
<v Speaker 2>them prohibited under federal law because of past convictions from owning, possessing, touching,

0:07:46.320 --> 0:07:50.360
<v Speaker 2>and thinking about or even making a finger gun. And

0:07:50.480 --> 0:07:52.480
<v Speaker 2>yet we saw what happened there, and now they're both

0:07:52.520 --> 0:07:55.320
<v Speaker 2>claiming self defense, which feels like some sort of standoff

0:07:55.320 --> 0:07:58.040
<v Speaker 2>here in a different way in the courtroom, maybe they're

0:07:58.040 --> 0:08:00.200
<v Speaker 2>both claiming self different Can two people in the same

0:08:00.240 --> 0:08:02.920
<v Speaker 2>gunfight both legally claimed self defense or there's a law

0:08:03.080 --> 0:08:05.760
<v Speaker 2>force conclusion one of them has to be the aggressor.

0:08:06.680 --> 0:08:09.920
<v Speaker 3>Well, they both can claim it, and then theoretically they

0:08:10.040 --> 0:08:14.040
<v Speaker 3>both could have an independent jury find that they acted

0:08:14.080 --> 0:08:17.640
<v Speaker 3>in self defense. But under this that they're both victims.

0:08:17.680 --> 0:08:21.720
<v Speaker 3>That's kind of weird, yees, Yeah, that's theoretical. So in

0:08:21.800 --> 0:08:24.600
<v Speaker 3>a law school exam, you know, that's that's an answer

0:08:24.720 --> 0:08:28.680
<v Speaker 3>for anyone listening. But technically speaking, you know, you cannot

0:08:29.040 --> 0:08:31.680
<v Speaker 3>claim self defense if you are the cause, if you

0:08:31.760 --> 0:08:34.439
<v Speaker 3>are the aggressor, and so a jury is going to

0:08:34.480 --> 0:08:36.199
<v Speaker 3>look at if they were to look at this case,

0:08:36.720 --> 0:08:39.480
<v Speaker 3>a jury's going to decide whom they think the aggressor is.

0:08:39.960 --> 0:08:43.000
<v Speaker 3>And you know, so far, the evidence seems to show

0:08:43.040 --> 0:08:45.800
<v Speaker 3>that shooter one pulled and just started shooting first, and

0:08:45.920 --> 0:08:49.800
<v Speaker 3>then shooter two got shot and then pulled. Under those facts,

0:08:49.960 --> 0:08:52.319
<v Speaker 3>I think a jury will determine that shooter one is

0:08:52.360 --> 0:08:55.000
<v Speaker 3>the aggressor. Now, so, so.

0:08:56.640 --> 0:09:01.520
<v Speaker 2>Cob Cob fired first, Okay, Cob puls Derek Lung pulls

0:09:01.559 --> 0:09:04.079
<v Speaker 2>a gun out, shoots him or shoots at him. I

0:09:04.120 --> 0:09:08.120
<v Speaker 2>guess anyway, does that being an initial aggressor, does that

0:09:08.200 --> 0:09:11.040
<v Speaker 2>completely eliminate any self defense claim that the cod can

0:09:11.160 --> 0:09:11.440
<v Speaker 2>raise her?

0:09:13.200 --> 0:09:16.480
<v Speaker 3>Theoretically, yes, it's one of those things too where you

0:09:16.600 --> 0:09:18.920
<v Speaker 3>and I. Let's say I walk up to you and

0:09:19.120 --> 0:09:21.800
<v Speaker 3>I push you, and I call you a name, and

0:09:21.880 --> 0:09:24.000
<v Speaker 3>then I start to walk away, and then you pull

0:09:24.080 --> 0:09:27.000
<v Speaker 3>out a knife and come at me. You know, a

0:09:27.160 --> 0:09:30.480
<v Speaker 3>jury could find that then you escalated it from a

0:09:30.559 --> 0:09:35.160
<v Speaker 3>simple push and a name calling to a now deadly assault,

0:09:35.280 --> 0:09:37.920
<v Speaker 3>and then I'm allowed to use deadly force. But again,

0:09:38.360 --> 0:09:40.120
<v Speaker 3>that's something that a jury is going to have to

0:09:40.200 --> 0:09:42.720
<v Speaker 3>decide and I think most jurors are going to say, look,

0:09:42.760 --> 0:09:44.760
<v Speaker 3>if you walked up to some guy, push him and

0:09:44.840 --> 0:09:47.760
<v Speaker 3>call him the name and then a fight ensues, I

0:09:47.800 --> 0:09:50.120
<v Speaker 3>don't think you can claim self defense because you were

0:09:50.160 --> 0:09:53.680
<v Speaker 3>the initial aggressor. Now, what a defense attorney is going

0:09:53.760 --> 0:09:55.520
<v Speaker 3>to try to say is, look, he pushed them and

0:09:55.559 --> 0:09:57.640
<v Speaker 3>called him a name and then walked away. That's the

0:09:57.840 --> 0:10:02.640
<v Speaker 3>end of that transaction. Transaction was Scott pulling an ice.

0:10:03.000 --> 0:10:05.920
<v Speaker 3>Now you have a whole new situation. Scott's the aggressor

0:10:06.080 --> 0:10:09.480
<v Speaker 3>and Jason is a defender. And so you know, that's

0:10:09.520 --> 0:10:11.400
<v Speaker 3>what a defense attorney's going to do. He's going to

0:10:11.440 --> 0:10:13.559
<v Speaker 3>try to take that one action, split it in the two,

0:10:14.120 --> 0:10:15.800
<v Speaker 3>and then the prosecutor is going to say, no, this

0:10:15.960 --> 0:10:18.640
<v Speaker 3>is all one action. You walk in, you push Scot,

0:10:18.880 --> 0:10:21.040
<v Speaker 3>you call him a name, and then a fight happens.

0:10:21.120 --> 0:10:24.679
<v Speaker 3>You can't claim self defense. And so I think the

0:10:24.760 --> 0:10:27.079
<v Speaker 3>other thing you're starting to see is people just claim

0:10:27.160 --> 0:10:29.720
<v Speaker 3>self defense. They've been doing that since the beginning of time,

0:10:30.240 --> 0:10:33.560
<v Speaker 3>and jurors look at it very closely and they start

0:10:33.600 --> 0:10:37.240
<v Speaker 3>splicing that up. Is who was the aggressor who started it?

0:10:37.880 --> 0:10:40.959
<v Speaker 3>Was the person's actions reasonable and at the end of

0:10:41.000 --> 0:10:45.760
<v Speaker 3>the day, you know, right now, self defense it theems

0:10:45.800 --> 0:10:49.160
<v Speaker 3>that will be applied when when it's genuine.

0:10:49.600 --> 0:10:49.800
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

0:10:49.880 --> 0:10:53.520
<v Speaker 2>Well, this also goes back to the Cincinnati brawl back

0:10:53.559 --> 0:10:57.240
<v Speaker 2>in July that Alex Cherinski Ford failed with the white

0:10:57.280 --> 0:11:00.599
<v Speaker 2>guy was charged in this case. You know, the the

0:11:00.720 --> 0:11:05.680
<v Speaker 2>video evidence indicates that Montus Merriweather, Jermaine Matthews, and Donna

0:11:05.800 --> 0:11:08.800
<v Speaker 2>Vernon are the ones who started this one. Particularly Mayweather

0:11:09.640 --> 0:11:14.000
<v Speaker 2>was taunting, pushing, shoving the white guy in this case.

0:11:14.040 --> 0:11:16.040
<v Speaker 2>So if you turn around and throw a punch at someone,

0:11:17.040 --> 0:11:18.840
<v Speaker 2>you know, we're talking about gun laws here and stand

0:11:18.840 --> 0:11:19.240
<v Speaker 2>your ground.

0:11:19.320 --> 0:11:20.280
<v Speaker 1>But the same thing applies.

0:11:20.320 --> 0:11:23.079
<v Speaker 2>If you feel you're under threat great bodily harm, you

0:11:23.200 --> 0:11:26.880
<v Speaker 2>can defend yourself. That's gonna you can't have it.

0:11:26.920 --> 0:11:27.520
<v Speaker 1>Both ways, right.

0:11:27.559 --> 0:11:28.920
<v Speaker 2>We can't look at this case and go, well, they're

0:11:28.960 --> 0:11:30.720
<v Speaker 2>good to but turn around and throw the book at

0:11:30.840 --> 0:11:31.520
<v Speaker 2>Aleis Dirinsky.

0:11:31.559 --> 0:11:32.760
<v Speaker 1>It's just it's not gonna work that way.

0:11:34.000 --> 0:11:36.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, And a lot of it comes down to the fact,

0:11:36.320 --> 0:11:38.839
<v Speaker 3>you know, so if i'm you know, if you've been

0:11:38.920 --> 0:11:41.400
<v Speaker 3>threatening me, you've been coming to my house, you've been

0:11:41.480 --> 0:11:44.840
<v Speaker 3>throwing rocks in my window, you've been you know, doing

0:11:44.920 --> 0:11:48.079
<v Speaker 3>all these pattern of conduct. And then I happen to

0:11:48.120 --> 0:11:50.199
<v Speaker 3>be walking down the street and I see you coming

0:11:50.240 --> 0:11:54.880
<v Speaker 3>at me menacingly, then one could argue I act and

0:11:54.960 --> 0:11:58.600
<v Speaker 3>self defense when I pulled my fire on first. But aposcy,

0:11:58.640 --> 0:12:01.560
<v Speaker 3>you're going to say, wait a second, all Scott did

0:12:01.840 --> 0:12:04.520
<v Speaker 3>was just, you know, walk towards you. That's not a

0:12:04.679 --> 0:12:08.400
<v Speaker 3>life threatening action, and so you didn't have a right

0:12:08.520 --> 0:12:11.560
<v Speaker 3>to use deadly force. And that's another thing a jury's

0:12:11.559 --> 0:12:14.640
<v Speaker 3>going to look at. If I push you, then you

0:12:14.800 --> 0:12:17.719
<v Speaker 3>theoretically can push me back to get me away, and

0:12:17.880 --> 0:12:21.040
<v Speaker 3>that would be that would be self defense because you

0:12:21.200 --> 0:12:25.120
<v Speaker 3>are using the appropriate force, non deadly force. But you

0:12:25.240 --> 0:12:28.640
<v Speaker 3>can't use deadly force when someone's using non deadly force,

0:12:28.679 --> 0:12:30.920
<v Speaker 3>and that's another thing to look at. So again, if

0:12:30.960 --> 0:12:33.480
<v Speaker 3>I come up and push you and then you pull

0:12:33.559 --> 0:12:36.120
<v Speaker 3>out a knife and stab me, one could argue that

0:12:36.240 --> 0:12:40.080
<v Speaker 3>you have used deadly force to only repel non deadly action.

0:12:40.640 --> 0:12:43.480
<v Speaker 3>And so those are things that the jury has to decide,

0:12:43.520 --> 0:12:46.280
<v Speaker 3>and that's what the attorneys and prosecutors are going to

0:12:46.360 --> 0:12:48.320
<v Speaker 3>argue about when when we get to a jury.

0:12:48.520 --> 0:12:52.760
<v Speaker 2>Exactly, Jason Phillibaum Cobb had a long standing grudge against

0:12:52.840 --> 0:12:55.360
<v Speaker 2>long How does premeditation factor to this.

0:12:56.679 --> 0:12:59.679
<v Speaker 3>It does. I mean, that's another situation where if I

0:12:59.840 --> 0:13:01.920
<v Speaker 3>go to a place where I know you're going to be,

0:13:02.880 --> 0:13:06.439
<v Speaker 3>I can't sit there and claim self defense when you

0:13:06.559 --> 0:13:08.920
<v Speaker 3>all of a sudden come at me pretty pretty rough.

0:13:09.360 --> 0:13:11.520
<v Speaker 3>I mean, obviously I can claim that, but a jury

0:13:11.600 --> 0:13:13.920
<v Speaker 3>is going to look at that very skeptically, which is,

0:13:14.320 --> 0:13:16.559
<v Speaker 3>if if I know you're at a place and I

0:13:17.080 --> 0:13:21.040
<v Speaker 3>fear for my life, then going to that place actually

0:13:21.200 --> 0:13:24.199
<v Speaker 3>is counterintuitive. I don't really fear for my life if

0:13:24.240 --> 0:13:26.079
<v Speaker 3>I'm going to a place where I know you're at.

0:13:26.679 --> 0:13:29.839
<v Speaker 3>And so the fact that there's premeditation of trying to

0:13:29.920 --> 0:13:33.000
<v Speaker 3>find somebody, I think takes away from the argument that

0:13:33.080 --> 0:13:34.240
<v Speaker 3>you were in fear for your life.

0:13:34.400 --> 0:13:35.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, gotcha.

0:13:36.080 --> 0:13:37.559
<v Speaker 2>So this is going to be referred als to the

0:13:37.600 --> 0:13:41.160
<v Speaker 2>federal court for the weapon under disability charge. But why

0:13:41.160 --> 0:13:42.880
<v Speaker 2>wouldn't the self defense argument work there?

0:13:44.400 --> 0:13:46.840
<v Speaker 3>Because in that particular case, all they have to prove

0:13:47.000 --> 0:13:50.199
<v Speaker 3>is you had a weapon while under some federal or

0:13:50.320 --> 0:13:54.480
<v Speaker 3>criminal or other disability. And so, first of all, a

0:13:54.480 --> 0:13:57.559
<v Speaker 3>lot of people get confused of disability, meaning like you know,

0:13:57.800 --> 0:13:59.800
<v Speaker 3>you can't walk, or you're in a wheelchair or something

0:13:59.880 --> 0:14:04.679
<v Speaker 3>like that. Disability for criminal is if you have a felony,

0:14:04.760 --> 0:14:08.720
<v Speaker 3>a prior felony or crime of violence, or maybe even

0:14:08.760 --> 0:14:11.960
<v Speaker 3>a protection or you are prohibited from having a firearm.

0:14:12.320 --> 0:14:15.040
<v Speaker 3>So that's called a legal disability. So if you are

0:14:15.160 --> 0:14:19.120
<v Speaker 3>possessing a firearm while under that legal disability, that's all

0:14:19.240 --> 0:14:23.000
<v Speaker 3>the prosecutor has to show. And so they may try

0:14:23.040 --> 0:14:25.920
<v Speaker 3>to argue self defense at the moment of the shooting,

0:14:26.920 --> 0:14:29.080
<v Speaker 3>But you still had the gun when you left the house,

0:14:29.480 --> 0:14:31.480
<v Speaker 3>you still had the gun when you went into this bar.

0:14:32.000 --> 0:14:34.960
<v Speaker 3>He's probably drinking and having it at the bar, and

0:14:35.040 --> 0:14:38.360
<v Speaker 3>that's another issue that consider. So that's all they have

0:14:38.480 --> 0:14:41.600
<v Speaker 3>to prove, and so self defense will not apply to

0:14:42.080 --> 0:14:44.920
<v Speaker 3>carrying a weapon while under disability.

0:14:45.320 --> 0:14:49.400
<v Speaker 2>Gotcha, Jason Philibaum. The Second Amendment I advocates argue that

0:14:49.440 --> 0:14:53.680
<v Speaker 2>weapons under disability unfairly stripped people of their inalienable, god

0:14:53.760 --> 0:14:56.520
<v Speaker 2>given inalienable rights. The second then, in particularly to self

0:14:56.600 --> 0:14:59.160
<v Speaker 2>preservation and self defense, does this case, or a case

0:14:59.360 --> 0:15:02.160
<v Speaker 2>like this where a prohibited person appears they have generally

0:15:02.200 --> 0:15:04.280
<v Speaker 2>needed a gun to survive, does that make the argument stronger?

0:15:05.920 --> 0:15:09.160
<v Speaker 3>Well, that's an interesting argument that they've been making for years.

0:15:09.360 --> 0:15:13.840
<v Speaker 3>But you know, when you're talking about, like the red

0:15:13.920 --> 0:15:16.080
<v Speaker 3>flag laws. I think that's where you get into a

0:15:16.120 --> 0:15:19.000
<v Speaker 3>whole due process issue and at what point, you know,

0:15:19.280 --> 0:15:21.800
<v Speaker 3>do you have the right Second Amendment right? But when

0:15:21.880 --> 0:15:25.480
<v Speaker 3>you have been found guilty of a criminal offense and

0:15:25.600 --> 0:15:30.480
<v Speaker 3>you're looking at a situation where a person's gone through

0:15:30.560 --> 0:15:34.320
<v Speaker 3>the jujitsial system, has gone through due process, and they

0:15:34.400 --> 0:15:37.480
<v Speaker 3>have found that you're guilty of that offense, either by

0:15:37.640 --> 0:15:41.760
<v Speaker 3>plea or by jury, then at that particular case, that's

0:15:41.840 --> 0:15:45.160
<v Speaker 3>where the course of hell that your Second Amendment right

0:15:45.280 --> 0:15:47.680
<v Speaker 3>is taken away. Just like you have a right to vote,

0:15:48.080 --> 0:15:52.280
<v Speaker 3>You have a right to you know, constitutional right to vote,

0:15:52.320 --> 0:15:55.440
<v Speaker 3>but if you have a felony, the Supreme Court and

0:15:55.560 --> 0:15:58.080
<v Speaker 3>other courts of hell that you can take that away

0:15:59.680 --> 0:16:03.880
<v Speaker 3>because of your felony status. And again there's you know, freedom,

0:16:03.920 --> 0:16:05.600
<v Speaker 3>We have the right to freedom, but if you commit

0:16:05.640 --> 0:16:08.200
<v Speaker 3>a crime and you go to prison, your freedom's taken away.

0:16:08.280 --> 0:16:10.480
<v Speaker 3>So I think that's the analysis the courts that I use,

0:16:10.600 --> 0:16:13.160
<v Speaker 3>where if you've gone through due process and you have

0:16:13.360 --> 0:16:15.760
<v Speaker 3>that criminal history, then they can take that right away.

0:16:15.880 --> 0:16:18.640
<v Speaker 2>Are we going to see this now as a legal template?

0:16:18.720 --> 0:16:22.440
<v Speaker 2>Jason Philibaum and that this weapons under disability defendant argument

0:16:22.520 --> 0:16:25.960
<v Speaker 2>that you know, you put yourself in a situation where

0:16:26.080 --> 0:16:27.480
<v Speaker 2>you're going to go see your mortal leend me or

0:16:27.560 --> 0:16:30.760
<v Speaker 2>carrying a weapon under disability, and you engage with another

0:16:30.840 --> 0:16:34.160
<v Speaker 2>person who probably has a weapon under disability. Is that

0:16:34.320 --> 0:16:36.200
<v Speaker 2>going to be the now legal template here, that it's

0:16:36.240 --> 0:16:38.280
<v Speaker 2>just going to be a self defect of self defense

0:16:38.360 --> 0:16:39.880
<v Speaker 2>claim and kind of law clean that up?

0:16:41.400 --> 0:16:44.480
<v Speaker 3>Well, I think they'll make that argument every time, but

0:16:44.560 --> 0:16:46.480
<v Speaker 3>I don't think a jury and a prosecutor is going

0:16:46.560 --> 0:16:49.120
<v Speaker 3>to buy it again. They have to look at the fact.

0:16:49.440 --> 0:16:52.520
<v Speaker 3>I think if I had a firearm in my house

0:16:53.160 --> 0:16:55.480
<v Speaker 3>and some guys breaking into my house and then at

0:16:55.520 --> 0:16:58.080
<v Speaker 3>the end of the day I had a weapons under disability,

0:16:58.440 --> 0:17:01.080
<v Speaker 3>that's where the self defense claim and can actually give

0:17:01.360 --> 0:17:04.119
<v Speaker 3>maybe some peace to their defense. But when you leave

0:17:04.200 --> 0:17:06.800
<v Speaker 3>the house, when you go to bar hoppin and you

0:17:06.960 --> 0:17:11.520
<v Speaker 3>go whatever, carrying a firearm, when you know that you're

0:17:11.600 --> 0:17:15.879
<v Speaker 3>not able to then theoretically if that defense where to fly,

0:17:16.160 --> 0:17:19.879
<v Speaker 3>then weapons under disability would go out the window anyway.

0:17:20.000 --> 0:17:22.000
<v Speaker 3>So I don't think that's going to I don't think

0:17:22.040 --> 0:17:23.800
<v Speaker 3>it's ever going to be extended to where you can

0:17:23.880 --> 0:17:26.159
<v Speaker 3>just carry it all times because some guy doesn't like you.

0:17:27.000 --> 0:17:28.960
<v Speaker 3>I think at the end of the day, you have

0:17:29.080 --> 0:17:32.440
<v Speaker 3>to look at the specific situation at the moment, and

0:17:32.520 --> 0:17:34.280
<v Speaker 3>you might be able to get out of the Floni's

0:17:34.320 --> 0:17:37.000
<v Speaker 3>assault or murder charge, but you're not going to really

0:17:37.080 --> 0:17:39.160
<v Speaker 3>be able to beat that weapons water disability.

0:17:39.359 --> 0:17:40.840
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, this is the hard case.

0:17:40.920 --> 0:17:43.200
<v Speaker 2>It's all start down in court, not just also in

0:17:43.280 --> 0:17:46.600
<v Speaker 2>Hamlin County, but obviously federally as well for these individuals.

0:17:46.680 --> 0:17:48.879
<v Speaker 2>And at the same time, I feel badly for the

0:17:48.960 --> 0:17:50.879
<v Speaker 2>owner of Riverfront Live. We tried to do everything he

0:17:50.920 --> 0:17:52.600
<v Speaker 2>could to make sure it was a safe environment and

0:17:52.680 --> 0:17:55.320
<v Speaker 2>yet at least two people who shouldn't have guns brought

0:17:55.359 --> 0:17:57.720
<v Speaker 2>guns into the venue. There's going to be a huge

0:17:57.800 --> 0:18:00.560
<v Speaker 2>civil lawsuit involving this as well, with millions and millions

0:18:00.600 --> 0:18:03.800
<v Speaker 2>of dollars at stake. Jason Philibaum, defense attorney, Thanks for

0:18:03.880 --> 0:18:04.480
<v Speaker 2>coming on the show.

0:18:04.560 --> 0:18:06.359
<v Speaker 1>Have a great weekend. Good luck with the time change.

0:18:07.240 --> 0:18:08.960
<v Speaker 3>I appreciate it. Be well.

0:18:09.320 --> 0:18:12.280
<v Speaker 2>Scott Sloan Show continues after news update in just seconds

0:18:12.640 --> 0:18:15.440
<v Speaker 2>here on seven hundred WW we'll get Will Gantz on

0:18:15.520 --> 0:18:16.919
<v Speaker 2>our ABC Entertainment guy.

0:18:17.000 --> 0:18:20.080
<v Speaker 1>Britney Britney Spears is in jail. Let me ask you something.

0:18:20.359 --> 0:18:23.760
<v Speaker 2>Is there anyone more of a rock star than Britney

0:18:23.800 --> 0:18:28.880
<v Speaker 2>Spears doing stuff that rock stars do. I mean, Harry

0:18:28.920 --> 0:18:30.639
<v Speaker 2>Styles is dropping a new album, will come with that.

0:18:30.840 --> 0:18:32.760
<v Speaker 2>Look at Harry South, that's a rock start. Now Britney

0:18:32.840 --> 0:18:35.080
<v Speaker 2>is doing rock and roll stuff right there, getting pop

0:18:35.200 --> 0:18:37.159
<v Speaker 2>for Dewey. We'll get into that next seven hundred w

0:18:37.320 --> 0:18:37.439
<v Speaker 2>al