What you need to know about the necessary defense in order not to go to jail

2024 Author: Malcolm Clapton | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 03:44

The law gives you the right to protect your life in any way. But only in truly desperate situations.

What is considered necessary self-defense?

Necessary defense is considered to be causing harm to an aggressor whose actions threaten life and health - yours or a third party. If you neutralize an attacker by beating or killing him, it is not a crime - it is written in the law. But there are nuances here.

It is only possible to respond with violence to comparable violence. If you were pushed into the subway and you stabbed a person for this, this is not defense.

The situation is similar with the protection of material assets. Shooting a thief who stole your wallet in the leg is not defense.

But even when the threat really exists, everything is not easy. If the court finds that you have exceeded the limits of permissible self-defense, you face punishment - correctional or forced labor, restriction of freedom, and even imprisonment for up to two years.

This happens if your actions, in the opinion of the court, did not correspond to the level of danger of an attack. For example, an opponent of inferior strength tried to beat you, and you stopped him by hitting a pipe on the head. Murder will also be considered an excess of the permissible defense if there was no threat to life.

A Tula resident was sentenced by a court to a year of restriction of freedom for murder in excess of self-defense measures. She stabbed her neighbor with a knife. The latter first beat her herself, and then swung at her son.

Two years? Where, then, do the defenders have such huge terms?

Suspicions of exceeding self-defense are not the worst thing. The investigation may accuse you of murder - intentional or negligent.

Alexandra Ivannikova killed a taxi driver who was trying to rape her. Initially, she was accused of intentionally causing harm to her health. She stabbed her attacker in the leg and damaged the femoral artery. As a result, the man died from blood loss. Later, Ivannikova was acquitted. Vera Pestryakova found herself in a similar situation. But they tried to jail her for premeditated murder.

How can I prove that my life was really in danger?

The Supreme Court considers that the following can serve as confirmation of a real threat to life and health:

1. Serious injuries such as injuries to important organs.
2. A weapon or object that the aggressor could use as a weapon.
3. Dangerous actions such as strangulation or arson by the aggressor.

At the same time, the demonstration of weapons and threats against you are already considered dangerous.

But even the presence of all this evidence does not mean that your actions are immediately recognized as self-defense and released to all four sides. First there will be an investigation and a trial. Further - how lucky.

Four armed robbers broke into the house of businessman Gegham Sargsyan. They beat him, his wife and four children, and threatened to kill him. For self-defense, the man used a kitchen knife - he killed three attackers. Initially, investigators opened a criminal case into the murder and only then closed it - not without public intervention.

In addition, the court may have a peculiar opinion about what constitutes a threat to life, which can be answered with murder.

In Tver, a woman was convicted of exceeding the permissible self-defense. Her husband struck her "at least 48 blows with his feet and hands on the head, torso and limbs, as well as at least three blows with a knife handle on the face and head." She managed to intercept his arm and stab him twice in the chest with a knife. But the court found that 51 blows to the head were not a sufficient threat.

And how to defend yourself? Either you die or you sit down

Not necessary. The defender really faces long trials. But in recent years, it has become much clearer how the law on permissible self-defense works. In 2012, the Plenum of the Supreme Court published a ruling, which clarified some points.

In particular, it says that the defender, when life is threatened, can defend himself by any means. External circumstances have become more important, which may prevent the threat from being assessed realistically. For example, if someone breaks into your house at night, you have no way of figuring out what intentions the guests came with.

The decree separately stated that if a person, defending himself, took away the weapon from the attacker, this does not mean that he is safe. So his subsequent actions can be self-defense.

But judicial practice rests not only on the decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court. To a large extent, it all depends on the lower instances, which consider specific cases.

In any case, when the choice is between life, albeit with a lawsuit, and death, it is more logical to choose the former.

I carry a weapon with me, is this an aggravating circumstance in self-defense?

The law itself does not prohibit the use of any means of self-defense in the face of real threats. In practice, everything will depend on the judge.

If you carry a weapon with you, took courses on its use, this can be regarded as preparation for premeditated murder.

The already mentioned Ivannikova had a knife with her. This saved her from being raped, but did not simplify the investigation. They even made claims against her that she did not wrap the entire knife with a cloth, but only the middle of the blade, so as not to injure herself when she took out the weapon.

What if I defended myself and injured my attacker?

Call an ambulance first. Perhaps doctors will be able to prevent the death of the aggressor. In case of exceeding the permissible self-defense, this will be another article, not related to murder. The terms for it are shorter.

Then you need to report the incident to the police. But don't stop there. Before the arrival of the police, it is important to contact a lawyer or at least with relatives and friends who can quickly find a defender - you really need him.

Things to Remember

1. If you have the option of not killing or maiming anyone, it’s better to take advantage of it.
2. If you can stop the attacker's aggression in ways that are more benign than killing, choose this option.
3. With a real threat that you will be killed, defend yourself by all available means - staying alive here is more important.
4. Even if you try to foresee all the risks in the defense, too much will depend on the individual referee. But trying to do this is not superfluous in any case.
5. Look for a very good lawyer if you come under investigation after you have defended yourself. He will build the right line of defense and, if necessary, give the case the necessary publicity - in such cases, public opinion plays an important role.