Good Samaritan uses concealed weapon to stop attack in Franklin County

[byron]

FRANKLIN COUNTY, Mo. (KMOV.com) -- A man is being held in the Franklin County jail on two charges of assault. Joshua Julius, 32, accused of beating and knocking down a 60-year-old man in what's being described as an unprovoked attack.
A good Samaritan who asked News 4 not to use his name for fear of retaliation, said he saw the attack play out as he drove on North Washington Avenue last Saturday.
"I noticed that the assailant's car shot out in the other lane and turned right back into the left rear quarter of the victim, and spun the car like a pit maneuver almost," he said.

The Union Police Department said they're at a loss as to why the victim was targeted because he and Julius didn't know each other.
The good Samaritan said he got out of his vehicle and ordered Julius to stop. But he said, when Julius didn't, he withdrew his concealed weapon and pointed the pistol at the suspect and told him again to stop. The man said Julius eventually complied with his instructions and laid on the ground until police arrived.
At one point, he said, it looked like Julius was about to get up.
"And the guy went to a push up position like he was going to maybe charge him again. And at that time, I just told him no more of that," he said. "At that time, you make more threatening moves and things are real now."

Police arrived and took Julius into custody. Union Police Chief Andrew Parker said Julius assaulted an officer while he was being booked at the police department, and that Julius also assaulted a deputy after he was transferred to the Franklin County Jail.
According to Parker, prosecutors concluded that the good Samaritan did nothing wrong when he used his concealed weapon to stop the attack.
"His actions were appropriate under the circumstances with what was going on with the victim, the 60-year-old man being assaulted by Mr. Julius," Parker said.
The good Samaritan said he's thought about what he did many times and wondered if it was the right thing to do. He came to the conclusion that he has no regrets about his decision to stop and help.
"Rather than drive by and hear that this guy got really beat up or even killed and would have to live with that. I just chose to pull my pistol and stop that from happening," he said.
The good Samaritan said he recently spoke with the victim who thanked him for what he did.

News

St. Louis, Missouri breaking and local news updates from KMOV News 4

www.kmov.com

 

[repete]

He did the right thing, unfortunately many times doing the right thing can end you up in jail.

 

[turbobike]

Sadly, here in NYistan, I would probably call LE, and wait till they showed up. If we intervened as a CC, we would probably go to jail for pointing a weapon at the guy....

 

[beebee]

Sad to say, here in NY the perp would have walked, and the "good guy with a gun" would have been charged with menacing,brandishing, terrorism, assault with a deadly weapon, and probably half a dozen other violations, and then thrown into jail..

I would love to think that if I were to ever have a similar "opportunity" to help a fellow citizen at some point I would do the same without hesitation..

However, when I am honest with myself, I realize that more likely I would quickly realize where I was, and the ramifications of pulling a weapon in this 'duty to retreat" state.

It sickens me to say it, but I have a feeling logic and self preservation would take over, and that poor 60 YO guy would get a terrible beating, and perhaps killed, when I was only a few feet away with a loaded weapon...... bob

 

[Chevusa]

Article 35 includes defending a 3rd party person.

 

[masterswimmer]

Article 35 includes defending a 3rd party person.

That doesn't mean there won't be a lot of financial hurt when the police say let the courts sort it all out.

 

[Chevusa]

4. A private person acting on his or her own account may use physical
force, other than deadly physical force, upon another person when and to
the extent that he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
effect an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person whom
he or she reasonably believes to have committed an offense and who in
fact has committed such offense; and may use deadly physical force for
such purpose when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to:
(a) Defend himself, herself or a third person from what he or she
reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical
force; or
(b) Effect the arrest of a person who has committed murder,
manslaughter in the first degree, robbery, forcible rape or forcible
criminal sexual act and who is in immediate flight therefrom.

 

[Chevusa]

That doesn't mean there won't be a lot of financial hurt when the police say let the courts sort it all out.

That's not how it would work. The case would be reviewed by the DA, and a decision would be made there. If it's borderline the DA would put together a grand jury panel, and they would decide if you should face charges. All of that would have to happen before you were charged.

 

[beebee]

Just because a law is written and clearly worded in NY means NOTHING.. We have argued these topics before here. ad nauseum.

Local jurisdictions hold sway all too often, and a LOT depends on the political makeup of local and county judges, sheriffs, DA's etc, state law be damned.
Here in Tioga County, a "good samaritan" as the one in that article might be seen as such.. 10 minutes down the road in Tompkins County, its a different world,, Radical leftist ideology abounds and the laws are likely to be applied from that viewpoint, rather than how they were originally written... Thats just the way it is...bob

 

[1075tech]

4. A private person acting on his or her own account may use physical
force, other than deadly physical force, upon another person when and to
the extent that he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
effect an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person whom
he or she reasonably believes to have committed an offense and who in
fact has committed such offense; and may use deadly physical force for
such purpose when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to:
(a) Defend himself, herself or a third person from what he or she
reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical
force; or
(b) Effect the arrest of a person who has committed murder,
manslaughter in the first degree, robbery, forcible rape or forcible
criminal sexual act and who is in immediate flight therefrom.

They used pronouns! Himself, herself. What about those that don't know what they are? Does the law not apply to them? This is unjust!

Oh... wait.... They/them/it won't likely need this law anyway as they are likely to not be helping anyone.

 

[innkeeper]

4. A private person acting on his or her own account may use physical
force, other than deadly physical force, upon another person when and to
the extent that he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
effect an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person whom
he or she reasonably believes to have committed an offense and who in
fact has committed such offense; and may use deadly physical force for
such purpose when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to:
(a) Defend himself, herself or a third person from what he or she
reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical
force; or
(b) Effect the arrest of a person who has committed murder,
manslaughter in the first degree, robbery, forcible rape or forcible
criminal sexual act and who is in immediate flight therefrom.

To play devil’s advocate. The above quoted law says

“(a) Defend himself, herself or a third person from what he or she
reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force”

the DA will explain to the jury that being punched does not constitute imminent deadly physical force (I disagree by the way). The bleeding hearts on the jury will be told the gunman acted out of aggression and overreacted to a simple argument over an accident. He should have called 911 and waited in his car for PD to arrive so he could be a witness. Oh wait in this state that’s a risk now too. Oh well poor old guy’s gonna get beat till the bad guy gets tired. The Good Samaritan rolled the dice on his life his future and his financial well being

 

[Chevusa]

To play devil’s advocate. The above quoted law says

“(a) Defend himself, herself or a third person from what he or she
reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force”

the DA will explain to the jury that being punched does not constitute imminent deadly physical force (I disagree by the way). The bleeding hearts on the jury will be told the gunman acted out of aggression and overreacted to a simple argument over an accident. He should have called 911 and waited in his car for PD to arrive so he could be a witness. Oh wait in this state that’s a risk now too. Oh well poor old guy’s gonna get beat till the bad guy gets tired. The Good Samaritan rolled the dice on his life his future and his financial well being

Could be. The big factor here though is that the victim was elderly and the attacker was younger, making is much easier to reasonably believe the force being used could result in death. The way the law is written, I am the one who has to reasonably believe it. Not you.

 

[repete]

Article 35 includes defending a 3rd party person.

Yeah, and we also have a Constitution and a 2nd amendment and just because we have it doesn't mean we follow it!

 

[innkeeper]

Could be. The big factor here though is that the victim was elderly and the attacker was younger, making is much easier to reasonably believe the force being used could result in death. The way the law is written, I am the one who has to reasonably believe it. Not you.

First let me say I mostly agree with you The elderly gentleman could have been killed with a single punch (happened in an incident in TX I believe). As far as reasonable belief I would say half true as far as who has to believe it. The person that steps in to help has to believe it and make that decision in a few seconds but the PD the DA and then the jury will have hours days or maybe weeks to decide after being fed info from every angle In most of NY I think you would be fine in this situation. (No shots fired). If you had to shoot ......that would be a different story. An older gentleman in Yates county NY shot a dog that was attacking a woman near his house. His guns were confiscated and he didn’t get them back for about a year. A local K9 officer even testified in his defense saying that he took appropriate action and did so in the exact manner the officer would have.

 

[Chevusa]

First let me say I mostly agree with you The elderly gentleman could have been killed with a single punch (happened in an incident in TX I believe). As far as reasonable belief I would say half true as far as who has to believe it. The person that steps in to help has to believe it and make that decision in a few seconds but the PD the DA and then the jury will have hours days or maybe weeks to decide after being fed info from every angle In most of NY I think you would be fine in this situation. (No shots fired). If you had to shoot ......that would be a different story. An older gentleman in Yates county NY shot a dog that was attacking a woman near his house. His guns were confiscated and he didn’t get them back for about a year. A local K9 officer even testified in his defense saying that he took appropriate action and did so in the exact manner the officer would have.

I could also say I reasonably believed that he was being robbed or that I reasonably believed that he was attempting to rob. That is also justified deadly force under the law. The law asks if you were in my shoes in that situation would it be reasonable to believe that? Not that it must have been just like that but was it REASONABLE to BELIEVE it.

 

[GOPerfect]

Sadly, here in NYistan, I would probably call LE, and wait till they showed up. If we intervened as a CC, we would probably go to jail for pointing a weapon at the guy....

Absolutely false information.

Seriously people, if you are going to be a gun owner and A member on this gun forum, basic understanding of our laws would be a great assistance.

 

[GOPerfect]

S 35.15 Justification; use of physical force in defense of a person.
1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subdivision two, use
physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she
reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself, herself or a
third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or
imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person, unless:
(a) The latter's conduct was provoked by the actor with intent to
cause physical injury to another person; or
(b) The actor was the initial aggressor; except that in such case the
use of physical force is nevertheless justifiable if the actor has
withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such
withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing
the incident by the use or threatened imminent use of unlawful physical
force; or
(c) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by
agreement not specifically authorized by law.
2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person
under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or
about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the
actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with
complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no
duty to retreat if he or she is:
(i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor; or
(ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police
officer or a peace officer at the latter`s direction, acting pursuant to
section 35.30; or
(b) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing
or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal
sexual act or robbery; or
(c) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing
or attempting to commit a burglary, and the circumstances are such that
the use of deadly physical force is authorized by subdivision three of
section 35.20.

 

[GOPerfect]

With the lack of knowledge and understanding of our laws, I wonder why so many in NY even bother carrying a gun!!

 

[Celt]

Could be. The big factor here though is that the victim was elderly and the attacker was younger, making is much easier to reasonably believe the force being used could result in death. The way the law is written, I am the one who has to reasonably believe it. Not you.

Im with you, but..... this is NY and its not UNREASONABLE to expect that cops would arrest a ccw holder first because in THEIR opinion a fist fight is not good enough regardless of the disparity of force (old man vs young man). That doesnt make it right, but in NY the odds are stacked against gun owners.

I think its great in this case the the police didnt arrest this guy, and the DA did not look to pursue charges. I commend those people for honoring their oaths! Its important to acknowledge the good guys just as it isto point out the bad ones.

 

[beebee]

With the lack of knowledge and understanding of our laws, I wonder why so many in NY even bother carrying a gun!!

We are intelligent folks that read, watch the news and are very aware of the political climate in much of the state of NY .. State laws and constitutional rights are meaningless in NY/NJ/California/Illinois/Maryland/Mass/Ct, and the list of other states like them is growing.;

Local DA's and judges have broad powers of interpreting the spirit and scope of laws and regulations.. Laws on the books are without value when a local DA and Judge are anti gun leftists... They are administered in the context of the local political climate... All one needs to do is watch the news stories concerning self defense with a gun... More and more people across the nation are having their lives destroyed for using a gun to defend themselves and others.. bob

 

[GOPerfect]

Serious question, where are all of these horrible news stories of people getting jammed up helping another? Are there that many stories of honest people getting arrested when they are within the guidelines of Article 35?

Maybe I am blind and I am not paying enough attention...

 

[Saltwater60]

I’m no English scholar as you all probably know but he withdrew his weapon?? Withdrew it. Wow.