Legal Beagles

Previous legend || Legal Beagles || Next legend

He Hit Me First!

Debunked: You must be hit thrice before retaliation can be construed as self-defense.

The concept of "self-defense" -- in which a defendant concedes that he or she in fact committed certain acts, but claims that such actions were necessary to protect self or others -- contains no magical formula about how many times the other person struck (or threatened to strike) the defendant.

As a general rule (though jurisdiction-specific statutes or case law will fiddle with the details), two basic elements must be proven, one subjective and the other objective. First, the defendant must subjectively believe that force and the level of force used were necessary to protect against the aggressive act of the "victim." Second, the defendant's actions must have been objectively reasonable: Would the average person, in that situation, have acted in that manner?

As always, for advice on the standards in your jurisdiction, please consult someone admitted to practice law in that jurisdiction.

Further reading: John F. Wagner, Jr., "Standard for Determination of Reasonableness of Criminal Defendant's Belief, for Purposes of Self-Defense Claim, That Physical Force Is Necessary -- Modern Cases," 73 A.L.R.4th 993 (1989 and all supplements).

Note: "A.L.R." refers to the American Law Reports, a series of published volumes (several series, in fact, from "A.L.R." through "A.L.R.1st - 5th" and "A.L.R.Fed.") The A.L.R. volumes are available at any respectable U.S. law school or law library. Copies of A.L.R. materials can also be obtained through WestLaw's WestDoc service, by entry of the citation (consisting of volume number, the A.L.R. abbreviation and beginning page number).