There are many ways to avoid a conviction when someone has been accused of a violent crime. Some people can prove that they were not the party involved in an incident by providing an alibi. Others might be able to convince the courts that they acted in self-defense.
People accused of assault, homicide and other violent crimes may not have attacked the other person. Instead, they may have responded to an imminent threat or a prior act of aggression by the other party. Those attempting to mount an affirmative defense based on claims of self-defense often need to prove that a reasonable person may have responded the same way.
Self-defense is theoretically lawful
People have the right to defend themselves, their property and even total strangers from threats of violence and criminal activity. However, it is generally necessary that those engaging in self-defense avoid intentionally instigating a confrontation. They also need to scale the degree of force that they use to the threat that they face.
Responding to a kick in the shins with lethal force is likely excessive and inappropriate. Another reasonable person is unlikely to view that as an appropriate amount of force or even a situation that warrants acting in self-defense.
When developing a self-defense claim for court, the goal is to establish that another reasonable person might perceive the situation as threatening. If other adults might feel concerned about their safety and compelled to use force in the same situation, then the defendant has a good chance of convincing others that their use of force was necessary and therefore lawful.
Reviewing the circumstances that led to violent criminal charges with a skilled legal team can help people determine what defense strategies they can employ. Claims of self-defense are subject to certain limitations under state statute and judicial precedent. Defendants who have appropriate support can respond effectively to serious criminal allegations.