Kystie Jaehnen, the good Samaritan who came to the officer’s aid, likely saving his life. (Photo: Fox19 Now)
Someone is physically attacking an officer of the law who is by himself. Meaning, he has no backup. Of course, you’re going to call 911 to report the incident if you have a phone handy. But as you wait for the police to arrive, do you get involved? Do you come to the aid of the officer, perhaps putting yourself in harm’s way to save his life?
What if you have a firearm nearby or on your person? How does that factor into the equation?
As you ponder those questions, consider the story of Kystie Jaehnen of Rising Sun, Indiana. She is now the subject of a civil lawsuit for coming to the aid of an officer in need.
Ms. Jaehnen shot and killed 25-year-old Justin Holland in February 2017 after she watched Holland “overpower,” according to eyewitnesses, an off-duty Indiana conservation officer who was responding to a call about a “disheveled man” in a “suspicious vehicle.” Despite just finishing his shift, the officer took up the call, arriving at the scene in his marked police cruiser.
Reports say that as the encounter escalated, the officer tried to put handcuffs on Holland. That’s when things between the two men got physical. Holland was getting the better of the officer. Believing that he may be reaching for the officer’s gun, Jaehnen who was in the area intervened. She shot Holland once in the shoulder, fatally wounding him. Jaehnen told authorities that she did so because she feared for the officer’s life.
It appears Mr. Holland, pictured above, had prior run-ins with the law. (Photo Fox 19 Now)
Following an investigation, authorities opted not to bring criminal charges against Ms. Jaehnen. Along with witnesses that corroborated her account of the shooting and the events leading up to it, police found drugs in Holland’s car and in his system. A toxicology report revealed he was high on meth, marijuana methadone, benzodiazepines, and dextromethorphan.
Seems like an open-and-shut case. A tweaker resists arrest, gets physical with a cop, overpowers the officer and right before it gets really violent a law-abiding citizen steps in and saves the cop’s behind. Case closed! Maybe on the criminal side of the law — but not on the civil side.
SEE ALSO: Dick’s Sporting Goods to Destroy AR-15s Pulled from Shelves
Holland’s family is now suing Ms. Jaehnen, the officer and the Indiana Department of Natural Resources. The family alleges that Jaehnen used excessive and unjustified deadly force against Holland.
“What we understand is our guy was parked legally in front of someone’s house. It was taken out of context. The off-duty officer engages him and the woman comes out and shoots him,” said attorney Blake Maislin in an interview with Fox 19 Now.
“If the officer was truly in harm’s way and he was going to die, she had the right to defend him,” Maislin continued. “But over and over what we have is a story of somebody engaging somebody else and claiming self-defense.”
Sgt Bill Halbig, of the Aurora Police Department, believes the lawsuit is “ridiculous.”
“It was a life or death situation. When you have someone that is trying to get your gun deadly force is justified,” said Halbig.
“She didn’t ask for it. She came to his aide and ended that deadly situation — which could have been very deadly in my opinion to the conservation officer,” Halbig continued.
Halbig is now leading the charge to raise money for Jaehnen’s legal defense. He started a GoFundMe page. Thus far, it’s raised over $25,000.
“This case is about more than the right or wrong of one party suing another,” says Halbig on the GoFundMe page. “Imagine not being able to come to the aid of another person for fear of being sued, possibly to the point of bankruptcy. The case is about a person having the basic God-given right and the 2nd Amendment right to defend both yourself and others and without the fear of civil retribution.”
Damned if you damned if you don’t, make up you minds you liberal minded excrement bags !
If I may, This whole situation is beyond sad, frustrating, and wholly unfair to the woman and the officer. it used to be in the State of Nevada that if you were cleared of criminal action, no civil action could be taken. this is not the case now. this state has become “califonria lite”. it used to be that if the cops did not take you in you were golden. now it is you will be taken in, your gun will be confiscated as evidence, you will be in jail, and you will be prosecuted twice, once in criminal court and once in civil court. this litigious society has become totally out of control. we sue and prosecute people at the drop of a hat. in the national reciprocity act it should state for all 50 states if you are cleared of any criminal charges, no civil action can ever be taken. it is just that simple. if you are found non-culpable criminally; civilly you should not be culpable. Taking a life is an awful, traumatic thing to have to do. Living with yourself afterwards can be difficult. At times it is very hard to pick up the pieces and move on after a defensive shooting. Sometimes it takes years to make peace with what you have done. you should not have to be subjected to the family of the dirt bag that needed to be shot in court making your life a living hell and tossing around accusations of needing monetary damages for shooting someone that needed to be taken out of civil society and making the world a better place to live. We now have a whole new branch of insurance these days due to the fact that there is a need for it. The litigious society we have become has made a demand to have CCWP insurance or SHIELD insurance. Insurance specifically for when you have to shoot a scum bag and his/her family come after you or the cops come after you for a righteous shooting. this insurance pays your legal bills. why should we need this? Why is it that the lawyers insist on making their money on people’s misery? I am at a total loss as to why we have devolved to such a willfully destructive society.
Well as is said NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED!
Without a doubt this woman did the right thing. For all of us carrying you should expect to be sued by the perpetrator’s surviving family no matter what. And in some instances, perhaps being arrested by law enforcement and having your weapon confiscated for evidence. After Wisconsin first passed conceal carry there was a good guy with a gun in an Aldi Store who shot an armed robber back in 2012.
http://archive.jsonline.com/news/crime/aldi-customer-wont-be-charged-in-shooting-sk42et0-138688529.html/
That good guy went through a year of legal battles against the police chump Ed Flynn before he received his weapon back. It is a good idea to enroll in USCCA membership for $247 per year to have that legal defense available to you for both criminal and civil suits.
Could not have said it better. You will be sued. Anyone carrying should have some type of insurance. As Bob points out, USCCA is a good choice. I use U.S. Law Shield. It also has a hunting protection option and will provide defense in the use of any legal weapon, not just a gun. Bottom line. Get something. The cost of defending yourself could ruin you and that is really the intention of these kinds of suits.
Too bad that Nazir Al-Mujaahid has since been found guilty in an unrelated tax fraud case and due to it being a felony has lost his firearm rights,
Without a body or dash came it sits at exessive force in my books.
How anyone with a brain and common-sense can read this story and come to the conclusion that excessive force came into play is beyond me. Wait, there’s my answer, THEY CAN’T. You are a textbook “progressive” libtard. May you reap all the rewards your ignorant position warrants.
Man, you are about an ignorant demoncrap.How is shooting someone in the shoulder excessive force?
I’m a Hoosier, trust me this will be thrown out.
Not only is the family shameless, so is the ambulance-chasing attorney. If I were an attorney, I would be embarrassed taking on a case like this.
Hope it works out for the good samaritan.
The lengths that some trash will go to squeeze some money out of an situation is incredible! This holland butt hole’s family should be ashamed and face a suit themselves!
Guess we all better live in States with a “Good Samaritan” law that covers a citizen’s right to save another’s life from criminal violence.
I’m going to look up which States have a “Duty to Assist” law. Clearly, this country is facing threats to our entire social fabric, to our most fundamental understanding of citizenship, even of humanity itself.
Abortion on anonymous demand for minor children, unreported to parents? Peeping Tom drones? Sexbot brothels? Unisex bathrooms for creeps, dumb kids, and people with catastrophic “gender uncertainty”?
Girl teachers notching their bedposts with minor boy-toys? Even worse: with children they want to marry and bear children for???? “Safe spaces,” coloring books, crayons, and Play-doh for so-called “adults” in college?
University professors whose “academic discipline” is “ecosexuality”????? Tree-huggers replaced by tree-effers? Since trees can’t exactly give consent, I guess these twisted mental cases are more accurately termed “tree-rapers”?
“Cisgender,” a term I use here for the first and final time? He!!, I don’t know the definition and adamantly refuse to learn it.
Women serving as combat infantryMEN in the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps? Gonna find, fix, and destroy our country’s enemies in close combat? In direct contravention and denial of several millennia of documented human history, with the past century’s unceasing confirmation that infantry combat is the Completely, Humanly Intolerable made into Omnipresent, Unremitting Routine?
Personal human identity adopted, dropped, or changed on the decision of some terminally weird person? “I identify as Native American today…” Response of “normal” person: “Oh, quick! Bend over and let me kiss your A$z!”
Explicit criminalization of conservative Constitutional thought? Motor voters, dead voters, 108% precinct voters, illegal infiltrator voters to vote themselves Americans’ tax dollars? Anonymous two-term presidents, openly hostile to the Constitution; allergic to the truth; mentored, raised, trained, sponsored politically by avowed Communists and criminal bombers? First Lady who trumpets the fact that she’s never been proud of her country? Deep State coups, championed by the outgoing president and the defeated presidential candidate?
Suing bakers for the wedding cakes they won’t bake? The Great Climate Cooling/Warming/Changing Socialist Hoax?
These social termites have chewed away so much wood that our national house is see-through, drafty, and barely standing. And the only legitimate target of all attacks is the Evil White Male.
Amen
Scum sucking lawyers have ruined this country, the judges are just as bad cause they used to be lawyers and they will help the brothers to get them some cash instead of throwing out junk suits like this.
Filthy Liberal Socialist made this civil suit possible.
“The case is about a person having the basic God-given right and the 2nd Amendment right to defend both yourself and others and without the fear of civil retribution”
That says it all and should be the end of the subject, yet…
Good for her. Chip in folks, even if it’s just ten bucks. It all adds up. I hope a 2A layer jumps in and does it for free.
A perfect example of why anyone who carries should have insurance like that offered by the USCCA or the NRA, and a 2nd Amendment attorney on retainer. We have a firm here in Virginia run by the former Virginia Attorney General that goes on retainer for $200/year for a family membership, and that is all you ever pay even if you need their services. Most criminal’s families have never taught their kids to take personal responsibility and they won’t either. It’s always someone else’s fault.
Any Judge sitting on a bench in an American Court that does not throw this out of his court . Has no respect for the millions of Police Officers or American fighting men , that have fought for his very freedom to set there . I am not saying respect , but I am saying freedom to sit there. Who am I to have a right to talk a 100% disabled Vietnam Vet and yes I engaged . As Forrest said , that’s all I got to say U get it..
Kill the lawyer. They have ruined this republic.
Start a counter suit against his family for frivolous persecution and defamation of character
Absolutely! And include emotional distress (and anything else that you and your lawyer can think up)!
Maybe this is a bit weird but, Why did an off duty officer receive a call about anything? Shouldnt this gone to a on duty officer?
Having served as a reserve police officer in a small town in central Calif. last century, I can attest that there are times when the nearest backup is over a half hour away…when they are running with lights and siren. You tend to take calls, even when you’re off duty, just because you’re there and that’s what you swore to do.
Sadly, I don’t think today’s officers are receiving nearly enough weaponless defense training (I was a WD trainer for our department) and that leaves them at an extreme disadvantage. When the only tool in your belt is a lethal one, it gets used way more than it should.
Just my dime’s worth (cause 2 cents isn’t worth ANYTH|ING).
Well;
I see we have one total idiotic ignorant moron with no brains, no understanding of laws truth and facts.
Back to your cell idiot.
We ought to round up all of these lawyers who are corrupting our country which is based upon the rule of law, and put them in a stadium filled with people like Holland. Maybe after they are used and abused by all of the criminals, they will join the side of law abiding people who respect the rule of law.
Better idea, talk all of the lawyers and people like Holland and put them on a ship and point the ship out towards the middle of the ocean. Whoops, I forgot the drain plug!
Totally stupid case. Judge should have enough sense to throw it out! He was fighting a cop, high on illegal drugs, and winning the fight, common sense says he was in the wrong. Could have gotten the officers gun and most likely kill him. No matter if the officer did violate his rights. That be something he could have contested in court…not fight the cop!
Trouble is… “common sense” is only common to those who actually have it!
She may have saved the officer’s life. If the suspects fanily suwd then what next , rhe officer’s family sues because ahe didn’t act?
I DO NOT understand why a Conservation officer would even be receiving a call like that.I grew up in central
Indiana. I have NEVER heard of Rising Sun,Indiana.Where is it?
I’d not settle. When tossed out of court. I’d counter sue.
Several states have good samaritan laws which obligate witnesses to become involved if they are in the presence of a crime. So, damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
No need for the contempt for the “mere” conservation officer. Don’t know about Indiana, but in my state they are fully trained and certified law enforcement officers. They don’t just check for expired fishing licenses.
Lawyers are free to take any ridiculous stupid case, and anyone is free to sue anyone, it seems. One reason so many of us think lawyers are one level below dogshit on the evolutionary scale.
Hopefully this one gets pitched out of court and the plaintiffs have to pay the Good Samaritan’s and the officer’s legal costs.
Lawyers; Control the country, Contribute nothing to the GNP. And rhymes with liars.
Let\’s not overlook the genesis of this entire story – leading to a good shoot – is that the government (law enforcement) got engaged without \”reasonable suspicion\”. A called-in description of \”suspicious vehicle\” and \”disheveled man\” does not justify LEO intervention in a citizen\’s affairs and civil rights. It sure as hell does not warrant an off-duty conservation officer responding. No crime was evident.This in no way excuses the dope-head, or criticizes the good Samaritan, but citizens have constitutional civil rights that LEOs should hold paramount in the performance of their duties. We have the right to be left alone – for now.
Wrong. It was a call from a concerned citizen, checking out the situation doesn’t mean he thought a crime was being committed, there is no burden on the citizen to prove reasonable suspicion when requesting a police officer to respond. If there was no problem, then the guy would have been on his way. But wait, there WAS something wrong with him, doped up and irrational/dangerous behavioral issues. Lesson learned that should have been applied at Parkland, and dozens of other instances.
Nope. Your argument would justify anyone SWAT-ing their fellow citizens for no valid reason any day of the week. Think about that. The government is not the answer to everything; nor is it like a parent charged with ending all disputes within their jurisdiction.You may enjoy living in a police state that is supposed to be altruistic, but I\’ll stick with the US Constitution and the rule of law. \”I\’m here from the government and I\’m here to help\” usually does not turn out well. LEOs are not employed to address every concern people come up with. Based on the description of the problem called in – no crime evident – the LEOs had no valid reason to interact with the man that got shot. Observe him, sure. Mess with him for no other reason than his disheveled appearance, NO. Facts unknown to the officer at the time of responding can not be used to justify his disregard for civil rights. Too many LEOs forget the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and the rights of each citizen supersede their own spontaneous inclinations or their formal training to ignore civil rights.Benjamin Franklin once said: \”Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.\”“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There\’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.”
― Ronald Reagan
Nice Trolling, “Truthseeker”. It is quite evident all the facts have not yet been elicited. Certainly YOU do not have the whole story. I would expect the law authorities, the DA and on-hand witnesses would have much better information than you.
I do not know what rock you have been living under, but a request/call answered by a ANY sworn officer means there is instant cause to “interact” with a suspected perpetrator. Your quotation: “… no crime evident – the LEOs had no valid reason to interact…” is not only totally disingenuous, it is utterly false and completely nonsensical!
Looking for the worst in those that are out to help the rest of society seems destined to failure—or at least I hope so!
Actually, methinks thee soundeth suspiciously like a LAWYER. You know: bending truth, snidely twisting reality, playing with words and disregarding fact(s)….
Just sayin’.
Funny thing is I served and took an oath to defend the Constitution, which includes the Right of the likes of you to speak your mind – such as it is. That oath does not have an expiration date and I have taken it serious enough to study long and hard.
Jumping my case with vitriolic blather just shows poor character, questionable critical thinking skills, and poor reading comprehension. It also suggests you may be an egotistical LEO that views the abuse of civil rights as no big deal. Reading more and writing less may well benefit you.
My purpose for posting was not trolling, or causing argument. It was to urge others to consider the Constitutional civil rights implications and how easily they can disappear when abuse becomes routine. My concern is with process, not individual LEOs. Plain and simple, I do not want our motherland turning into a place where “show me your papers” is routine practice for what are supposed to be civil servants; it has drifted too far in that direction.
“Educate and inform the whole mass of the people… They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.” Thomas Jefferson.
“Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent.” U. S. Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis
“Our government… teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.” U. S. Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis
What attorney Blake Maislin meant to say was that “Our guy” is ambulance-chaser jargon for his only meal ticket this month.
So if I understand this correctly, this piece of human?waste, with all those drugs in his system actually died of lead poisoning?
Very good summation.
Off duty CONSERVATION officer? Who’s allowed to manhandle you next off duty postal personnel?
Actually, CO’s for the most part in most states have the same powers as the State Police.
That’s right. They go to the sa.e law-enforcement academies and pack a pistol.
He’s a SWORN Peace Officer, just like any cop, you MORON.
Anybody or their family should not be able to sue for any reason if they are in the commission of a crime.
Crime is assumed in this situation is it not?
The point I’m making is an informed man has to know the difference in LAW, statutes, codes , and policy?
Criminal has to do with law not the other three. If you do not know what I’m referring to then we are wasting each other’s time.
Off duty dog catchers and other public employees suffer the same consequences of violating rights enforcing statutes, codes, and policy under the color of law.
Like most people, you confuse LAW with JUSTICE. So sorry, but not the same thing.
Yep. Look at all the unconstitutional laws and regs.
You might be making a valid point, but it is not clear in your comment.
The story is not about the potential abrogation of a citizen’s rights. It is about follow-on activity that left a person dead, and whether or not the shooter is liable for civil damages. Focus on the shooter, not the officer.
A jury will likely find the officer violated the victim’s rights. I will be somewhat surprised if the shooter is held accountable, but with juries, the truth is not always what matters.
Umm, many, many calls everyday for a suspicious vehicle or person, and they get handled just like they are supposed to. This officer, apparently had the same authority as police, just ended his shift, and responded because he was the closest leo, and it should have been just a routine stop just to check on the vehicle and the person. Routine until the drug crazed fool decides to fight the officer, now there is a crime being committed. Whether or not there was a crime in the first place has no bearing simply because it would have been a routine check on a suspicious vehicle and or person. Answer a couple questions and your on your way, except the officer was confronted by a violent tweaked out criminal. Lawsuit should be thrown out of court.
Great job! A first responder to the aid of another first responder. Does anybody believe the ending would have been different. Had a second officer been there? The final outcome would’ve been the same.
She needs to counter sue them for everything they have including the trailer.
That’s right. And the slimy ambulance chasers need to pay, too. England and the rest of Europe do not have a fraction of the lawsuits filed in the U.S. There are too many lawyers desperately scrounging for a few bucks. They should have gone to trade school, instead, to earn an honest living.
What? And get their hands dirty?!!! You jest, Sir!
I suspect Justin Holland was one of those rich kids who got away with far too much growing up because his mommy and daddy had deep pockets and daddy never gave him any discipline because mommy was running things in their house and her little baby was always the victim. They probably spent 10s of thousands of dollars on lush resort style rehabs to help him but never thought to let him be held accountable, which might’ve saved him. You might say they just loved him to death if that’s how you define love. I’ve seen it all before and he probably robbed them blind to support his habit. They might be trying to recoup their losses.
I think you got the whole story wrong. This happened in Indiana. The guy grew up in a trailer and the family all wear “wife beater-tee-shirts”. They probably live on welfare when there are no drugs to sell.
Good for her. She saw the disparity of size and strength, and aggression beyond normal. Her decisive action saved that officer, and her life.
Good for her. She recognized his aggression disparity. I hope her peers she right through this shaam ambulance chasing piece of crap. If the suspect took the initiative to do treatment he might still be there. Look kids, this is consequences of ones bad choices. All HIS bad choices.
Too bad you cant shoot the shithead lawyers that take these cases in the first place.
Judge should throw the case out on day one.
Stupid idiot asked for and got it. When you see a cop in trouble to the point a weapon can be taken you have a green light to intervene and assist. The attorney of the victim’s family is nothing more than an ambulance/hearst chaser and I hope he and his client loses.
COP??
Hala, why don’t you take your scumbag trolling ass off here. Conservation Officer’s ARE cops you loser. They are sworn officers and can enforce State Statues just like State Troopers, County Sheriff’s Deputies or your municipal City police officer. Next time you see a Conservation Officer, why don’t you go up and him. See what happens Douche.
Hala, why don’t you take your scumbag trolling ass off here. Conservation Officer’s ARE cops you loser. They are sworn officers and can enforce State Statues just like State Troopers, County Sheriff’s Deputies or your municipal City police officer. Next time you see a Conservation Officer, why don’t you go up and slap him. Then see what happens… Douche.
It appears the late Mr Holland was spawned from the exact people who should never have reproduced.
Raise your kids better and this crap would not happen as much! A druggie that was high at the time attacks, How dose the family think they are going to win this.
The LEGAL system is set up to use the COURTS and paid for LAWYERS for every matter that involves any LAW….it is a BUSINESS MODEL…and keeps far to many EMPLOYED and overpaid…while ruining far to many ‘law abiding citizens….and catering to the ‘criminals’ who go out again into society committing ‘crimes’ that AGAIN require them to be in the ‘system’ for yet again another ‘court appearance with lawyers and judges etc etc..”’Revolving door BUSINESS MODEL….imho
The time between what’s happening and the arrival of backup is crucial. Did you think of that, genious?
C’mon!! EVERY READER here has some pocket change to contribute to this woman! Get on it!
This lady should have been a member of the USCCA, then she would have had insurance that pays for just such an occurrence.
Check’em out!!
I made a donation. So should all of us that are able.
She might have captured the assailant’s attention by firing a shot in the air and ended the confrontation. Howver I certainly weep no tears for one less druggy scumbag who was soon going to do us all the favor of doing an OD.
Sorry Steve wrong answer. If you were a responsible gun owner you would realize that when you decide to draw your gun from it’s holster, warning shots aren’t part of the process. Should you decide to do so it is with the intention of stopping the perpetrator from killing yourself or someone else. You should certainly command the criminal to stop and if he doesn’t you shoot for center mass until the threat is over. Can you tell me where that shot you fired into the air is going to come down and assure me it isn’t going to kill an innocent person?
Your comment is so ridiculous that I don’t even know how to fully respond. You never, ever, ever fire a warning shot. You obviously have never dealt with a tweaker if you think a loud noise will scare him away. He may have just left the officer and attacked the woman. She did the right thing, he deserved what he got. The department and police union should be assisting her in the lawsuit.
And when the bullet ricocheted off the ground or came back to earth after being fired into the air???? You are responsible for every bullet out the muzzle. You make them count, and used the minimum number to get the perp to STOP. She did.
If Indiana is like most states, he was a sworn officer, as much a COP as any PO. While the job functions are greatly different, he has the authority to intervene in suspected criminal activity.
Don’t let it get that far. States need to enact restrictions against a criminal or a criminals family bringing a civil suit anytime a person involved in a crime is injured or killed while in the commission of a crime. End of story. But the trial lawyers will never let that happen if they can stop it. Less money for them and to hell with the Good Samaritan.
IN does have a good Samaritan law on the books but it is worded so poorly that this type of suit still happens.
Hey Kirk Jones what are you a scum sucking, crooked as a snake with a back injury, trial lawyer are a drug addicted thief that steals from others to finance your habits? Are a frigging un American, chicken shit liberal? No matter it’s all the same! STFU! Your not the only one that can read! There was no back up officer! When he got there it could have been to late geniuse! Sorry your drug addicted piece of shit friend got what he deserved! So you try read the story again AH!
Lawyers…..You lose. You pay BACK all the money your frivolous suit cost others. Facts speak for themselves. You do drugs; do stupid things…..somebody might shoot you…..DEAD! Oh, but Wait!……He was such a good boy…..NOT!
Kirk Jones, considering your poor employment of grammar as well as punctuation, coupled with your ignorance of the Constitution, I would question whether you attained more than “D’s” in your high school courses.
What..Is this an ad for insurance..Is this story even real..What we should be questioning is what the heck is wrong with our legal system where it allows criminals to get the upper hand..Should we start disbarring lawyers..Oh yeah and that insurance ..buy it and see how well that doesn’t work..
Blame it in the state legislature. It wouldn’t happen in Texas. The law in TX says if it’s a good shoot, you can’t be sued in civil court.
The lawyer who took this case should be tared and feathered in public!
Indiana laws says:”“A person is justified in using reasonable force against any other person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.”
In short if you are defending yourself or another from imminent attack you have the right to use reasonable force to defend yourself or the other person. However, to use deadly force you must demonstrate that you or the other person is facing a situation that can cause serious bodily injury.”
If that officer, or bystander, felt his or her life was in danger, the bystander can legally act on their behalf. I think someone trying to grab the arresting officers gun qualify’s as something that can can cause serious bodily injury, end of story!! What would’ve or could’ve happened to all those around had he been able to get that gun high on all those drugs!?!?
Well said!
Always carry liability insurance specific to self defense shooting! NRA, USCCA, what ever.
Nothing like being a year behind on reporting something. Go to the Fox 19 Now link and look at the date year old news.
Actually you are wrong. The incident was a year ago, but On April 6, 2018, Kystie received a summons from Blake R Maislin LLC, (Thomas J Dall, Attorney at Law) regarding a wrongful death lawsuit for the assailant, J. Holland. Ohio County Superior Court Case No.:58C01-1802-CT-00001. The Officer involved was also named in the suit.
The cop was conservation. Not his business. Should never have become involved in it. It was not an emergency. Should have waited on the goon squad.
By your comment I take it your either a lawyer or a druggie/criminal . A druggie/criminal I would guess, because a lawyer would know a conversation Wildlife Officer has more authority than a regular uniformed officer.
Andy, you are incorrect. If Indiana is like most states, he was a sworn officer, as much a COP as any PO. While the job functions are greatly different, he has the authority to intervene in suspected criminal activity. Your comment addresses that issue, and that issue only, in which you are wrong.
I will agree with you that it may not have been a good choice for him to respond. But as for authority, he has it.
One thing I wish they’d change about the judicial system is, if the party bringing the case loses, all of the money spent by the other party defending him/herself from frivolous lawsuits has to be paid back and the lawyer’s license gets suspended until that happens. But, I digress…
Thanks for bringing this injustice to our attention. I hope everyone that reads it can contribute something.
Civil case just counter sue for $50,000 for Deranged and drug hyped predator causing trauma to innocent people that will cause mental distress for the rest of the shooter’s life, and the police officer just trying to do his job. Lawyer should also get stiffed for trying to make money off an immoral swindle. Moral of the story should not bring a wrongful suit against a person just trying to do the right thing. This was a drug induced person chemically empowered to endanger other peoples lives. The choice to consume illegal drugs and become animal like in behavior was their choice and the family trying to enrich themselves by driving good people to end up bankrupt and ruined is an immoral attack. The druggie got what he deserved. Thank god he got killed and the greater society did not have to pay for his jail time. Don’t screw with victims of illegal actions. This might discourage people from doing the right thing. The parents should be ashamed for actually raising a bad offspring. They should have to do some rewarding of the people who most likely did not have a good sporting day and take any pleasure killing a dangerous animal. Maybe they should bag, tag, and make a statue to celebrate the offing of a drug user and worthless, wasted self inflicted departure.
If we start allowing uninformed public opinion to determine that a “lawyer should also get stiffed for trying to make money off an immoral swindle.”, we in deep shit. While I agree that this is a cheap money-grab, nobody in history has come up with a better, absolutely fair process for holding people civilly responsible for their actions.
The problem is that the PEOPLE, not the lawyers, first realized that there is money to be made in every perceived injustice, and the LAWYERS then answered the call. Now, LAWYERS are encouraging people to sue over nothing.
The failure of our courts to instantly, and regularly, toss out “frivolous lawsuits” is at the heart of this problem. PEOPLE and LAWYERS are only doing what the judges allow them to do.
Just one more glaring example proving that there should be open season on lawyers. The system they have corrupted with their greed and immorality will be improved only by eliminating the current players and starting with a clean slate
She should have let the back up officer handle the situation. Stop using the 2nd amendment as a right to kill read what it say before you open your dumb thoughts. If you haven’t read the 2nd amendment don’t reply to me read it 1st and I hope you got more than a D high school diploma. She will pay when the real law show up to court and a warning to all.
How long would it have taken the ‘backup officer’ to arrive, assuming there was even one on the way?
Yours is probably one of the dumbest comments I have ever read on the internet. The Second Amendment is in place so that We the People will always have a way to defend ourselves and others, whether from a fellow citizen that has gone off the rails, an invading foreign army, or our own government if need be.
You should also brush up on your writing skills before posting. Not only is your comprehension of the Second Amendment incorrect, your use of the written word is atrocious.
FYI, I graduated high school with honors, and hold two college degrees, both earned with honors.
Think, don’t feel.
@kirk L jones: Stop twisting the facts to suit your agenda.
I imagine that you’ve never been in a life or death situation or even a fist fight and are only regurgitating the rhetoric you’ve heard in CNN, NPR or ABC. This has nothing to do with the second amendment other than this woman has a legal right to own and carry her weapon. She did the right thing by taking a ton to defend another who was in grave danger by a violent offender rather than pitifully running away and pissing yourself. When seconds count, the choices you make can save a life or haunt you for the rest of your life. I support her actions.
Kirk: You are clearly a part of the problem in this country. You and people like you deserve the Gas Chamber. That dude was scum of the Earth, high on how many different illegal drugs and trying to murder another person, who just so happens to be a cop. You must of been that d-bags pin cushion, who swallowed his watered-down load every chance you had. I hope you and yours ROT!
Read it again, Kirk and then talk to me about the ‘D high school diploma’. Geeze, I hope you don’t have a permit to carry.
The article says the officer was being overpowered by a drugged-up assailant. There wasn’t time for back up to get there.
You obviously don’t understand the law. Even though the 2nd Amendment is the blanket that covers the right to firearms, Indiana state law covers this situation and suggest you read Indiana Code Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure § 35-41-3-2.
This has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. Quit trying to sound educated by doubting the knowledge level of other readers. Or, perhaps cite the 2nd amendment and explain your case. This is a case of justified use of deadly force. A civilian is typically justified to use deadly force when they believe that they OR other innocent persons are reasonably believed to be in eminent danger of death or serious bodily injury.
Kirk, there were NO backup officers at the scene. I have read the 2nd amendment, and I have read the writings of the men that wrote it. The 2nd amendment has NOTHING to do with self defense or defense of another. The writers of the 2nd amendment acknowledged that the right to defend one’s life, or the life of another, is a God given, human right. It was not a right that they had to put into the Constitution. It was common sense. And the right to self defense doesn’t mean to the right to kill, but if the aggressor dies as a result, the lay pretty much says they put themselves into that situation. So Kirk, you go back and read the writings of the men that wrote it. And while your at it, read Masaad Ayoob’s book “Deadly Force – Understanding Your Right to Self Defense”. It is a must read for lawyers (as a matter of fact, he teaches seminars to lawyers on this subject). I predict the judge will throw this out.
Being originally from Indiana, all I can say is you are not only foolish, but illiterate.
This isn’t about the 2nd, silly boy, it’s about Indiana Statutory Law.
Now in addition to that, your grammar and punctuation are so bad, that for you to make a statement concerning other peoples grades in H.S. is laughable!
And then you make a prediction about the outcome of the trial?
And a dire warning?
LOL!!!!!!!
Kirk L Jones, you haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. Are you on those same drugs?! Put yourself in the officers position. The criminal was trying to take the officers weapon! This places the officer & anyone in the vicinity in immediate threat of great bodily injury or death. Any officer responding to the scene very likely would arrive too late. The woman more than likely saved the officers life. Would you rather let the criminal live? Would the criminal then turn the gun on her? Then the criminal has killed two law abiding good people & could make his way to your house or mine! Are you completely unable to figure this out on your own?! It’s no wonder we have so many problems on this planet with the untold numbers of thoroughly confused people. Try to keep your untrained & uninformed opinions to yourself. You’ve completely embarrassed yourself.
One commenter said that this case will be squashed and nothing will happen but, that will only be after Kystie Jaehnen has gone through enough of her finances to put her in bankruptcy. All this because some greedy lawyer wants to make money. Frivolous cases like this would go away if the courts would rule that the perpetrator, and lawyer, bringing the case had to pay all of the good Samaritan’s expenses, including lawyer’s fees. But, that won’t happen because the judges are lawyers.
“Defense of others” is legally speaking an allowable use of deadly force. Whether or not the officer’s initial contact and actions were correct has nothing to do with the woman. The decedent’s attempt to grab the officer’s gun, presumably to use it on him, was clearly illegal and resulted in death of the assailant.
That’s what wrong with this country everybody searching for a free payday. A person does the right thing and now is being sued for it. If a lawyer is dumb enough to try and sue he should be held accountable for frivolous law suits and potential bar from law. Maybe that would potentially help cutdown on these stupid law suits. Your are trying to persecute a person for doing the right thing. BS!!!!!
Further proof that idiots on drugs do stupid things that usually end up poorly for them. My question is why none of the other bystanders stepped up to help?
My answer to this scenario is USCCA. $70/yr and I get peace of mind. Kudos to her for stepping up to do the right thing.
SuperG… $70/yr where did you get that dollar amount from, last time I saw it was three different tier prices.
$247…$347…and $497 Please let me know how you are only paying $70. I would also like that deal.
Shoot lots and stay safe.
It will be tossed out and nothing more will become of this case
Except she’ll have to pay for an expensive lawyer and waste money in the stupid judicial system. That’s just plain wrong.
Don’t bet on it…you never know unfortunately. As someone else said, she will have a ton of problems and will most likely be ruined financially, etc, etc. This country genuinely needs a severe PURGE – there is NO other viable option to save this land, yes, it has come to this…we are there, past there.
a year ago she already had $25,000 in a go fund me account. She has the full support of the public and likey has the ability to raise enough funds to pay for her entire legal process here. People that claim someone will go bankrupt just because a lawsuit is filed likely have no real knowledge of the civil court process and only make comments to increase the fear mongering. I too think it is wrong that she is being sued but hopefully a few of us can keep a cool head about things.
Those suing the good Samaritan are LOSER’S and sad individuals period, I thank the lady for coming forward to help an officer in need. We need more Americans like her!
This is what happens when lawyers get a scent of cash. With less moral sense than the average gutter rat, the lawyer in this instance seems intent on getting a day in Court (or better, a cash settlement from which he will profit handsomely), regardless of the corrosive effect of his actions on society as a whole, or their city in particular. One assumes the “family” of the tweaker will appear tearfully bewailing the fate of their “loved one”, all for the purpose of driving up any settlement, when in fact they are likely relieved that the scumbag will no long be a curse on their household. Nuisance lawsuits like this should result in the lawyer being disbarred and spending time behind bars. This is an insane outcome for a courageous action, which deserves to be applauded.
Hey, I’m offended. And, so are my pet gutter rats. They’re nothing like lawyers and hold to a much higher level of morality.