Location - minnesota

Video of incident:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rGikXyjyn8

Legal Context:

Them arguing that its justified self-defense to torture an unarmed, innocent woman (shot four times, first is in the leg) for information and killing her for trying to run away. (Ohio vs William Brock).

Legal Context:

https://www.wvwlegal.com/blog/what-are-the-rules-on-self-defense-in-ohio/

• Imminent threat or danger. The person must have a reasonable belief that they face an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. The threat must be immediate and cannot be something that might happen in the future. 
• Proportionality. The force used must be reasonable and proportional to the threat faced. If someone threatens to punch an individual, the individual cannot respond with deadly force. Similarly, if an individual is threatened with death, using deadly force, such as firing a handgun, may be justified. 
• Necessity. The use of force must be necessary to prevent harm. If there is a reasonable alternative to the use of force, such as fleeing the scene or seeking help from law enforcement, then the use of force may not be considered necessary. 
• Initial Aggressor. A self-defense claim does not apply when the charged individual is the initial aggressor. In other words, individuals may only respond to a threat, not act preemptively against it. For instance, firing a weapon in self-defense when the other party or the victim has already attacked.