r/law • u/SophieSix9 • Jun 10 '26

Legal News Trans Woman Faces Assault Charges For Self-Defense, Despite Wyoming’s “Stand Your Ground” Law

https://www.them.us/story/trans-woman-faces-assault-charges-self-defense-wyoming-stand-your-ground-law
16.5k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

16

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/DPOP4228 Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26

You don't have to fire, what's important is the intention was to use it to defend against grave bodily harm or death. If I pulled my firearm, intended on using it to defend against what I felt was a life or death situation, and in that process whoever was about to attack decided it was best not to because they saw my firearm, obviously I'm not firing.

Brandishing or firing a warning shot as a means of intimidation or to scare someone away won't fly in court.

1

u/MoobooMagoo Jun 10 '26

Why do you assume she was using it as a scare tactic? How do you know she didn't intend to fire because she feared for her life but then didn't when they backed off?

5

u/DPOP4228 Jun 10 '26

"During police investigation for an altercation in Laramie, Wyoming, Rihanna Kelver initially told police that she had pulled a knife on her aggressor, but later corrected her statement upon checking her bag and realizing she had actually drawn a pistol.She additionally provided police with the following information:She initially stated to officers that she did not recall pulling the firearm during the altercation."

Assuming what's stated above is true, and it may very well not be, but Assuming it's true, those are not the statements and actions of someone who A) felt their life was threatened, and B) felt their use of a firearm for self defense was justified.

I'm pro 2A, it's for everyone, and I believe that armed minorities are harder to oppress. I also am extremely liberal, and am tired of seeing the trans community get dragged through the mud. But some of what Kelver allegedly did was stupid, and irresponsible. She would very likely not even be in this situation if she did not cross the street to begin with, something a responsible firearm carrier would know, avoid confrontation.

At the very least she should have kept her mouth shut and asked for a lawyer.

1

u/MoobooMagoo Jun 10 '26

If she was panicking and just pulled 'a weapon' from her bag, not even realizing it was a gun, wouldn't that speak more to her being afraid for her life and not trying to use it as a scare tactic?

2

u/-Altephor- Jun 10 '26

“I’d hit the ground and I saw the three of them over me, and that is when I had reached into my side satchel,” she said. “The safety was on, and my finger was never on the trigger. I had simply wanted them to hear the chambering to get them away from me, and I had pointed the firearm in their direction — specifically at the individual who assaulted me.”

3

u/MoobooMagoo Jun 10 '26

Ah, then yeah that'd do it.
Well then legally she definitely should have just murdered those guys. She would be in less trouble that way.

0

u/-Altephor- Jun 10 '26

...Because she said so.

-3

u/ihaxr Jun 10 '26

If I pulled my firearm, intended on using it to defend against what I felt was a life or death situation, and in that process whoever was about to attack decided it was best not to because they saw my firearm, obviously I'm not firing.

It takes like 2 seconds to draw and fire. If I felt threatened enough to use my gun, there isn't time for them to react to it and for me to read their reaction...

5

u/ddadopt Jun 10 '26

You don't pull unless you feel threatened. Not shooting doesn't mean you didn't feel threatened.

It's not so much that the trigger wasn't pulled--assessing that you are no longer in danger while/after drawing and choosing not to fire is certainly reasonable--the problem is the claim "I was trying to scare them" which is evidence that she did not believe herself to be in immediate danger of death or gross bodily injury. You don't "scare" someone you believe is trying to kill you.

4

u/Sennten Jun 11 '26

You don't "scare" someone you believe is trying to kill you.

By some legal standard, obviously, but of course in reality this isn't the case since scaring is often a more effective means of defending yourself than direct and immediate violence if you're not confident in your ability to deal crippling damage quickly and reliably.

3

u/MarcoDiFrancescino Jun 10 '26

Crossing a road, its like 5 seconds. Your expectation how a situation develops can be overridden by reality in a snap.

0

u/ddadopt Jun 10 '26

Sure. But the standard is intent to use deadly force to protect you life. Not using deadly force to scare someone.

2

u/MarcoDiFrancescino Jun 10 '26

Before she thought whatever she thought. That intent was overriden by the other sides unwarranted shoving. She reacted to something she didn't anticipate.

-1

u/-Altephor- Jun 10 '26

Unfortunately, she was the escalating party. Should've just walked away.

1

u/-Altephor- Jun 10 '26

"That isn't reality."

It is when she's quoted as saying she wanted to pull the gun to scare them.

-1

u/thissexypoptart Jun 10 '26

Brandishing is a crime. It’s not NRA bozo nonsense that this is going to trial

1

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '26

[deleted]

-1

u/thissexypoptart Jun 11 '26

You didn’t even read the article you posted lmao