Not Just Rittenhouse: The Crucial Self-Defense Case You Didn’t Hear About

Not Just Rittenhouse: The Crucial Self-Defense Case You Didn’t Hear About

The case of , a black man in Florida, occurred at the same time as ’s. While both mens’ cases sparked fierce arguments about the right to self-defense, very few people have heard of the former.

SEE ALSO: High-Ranking Police Officer Fired After Anonymously Donating $25 to Kyle Rittenhouse

Rittenhouse went to Kenosha, Wisconsin on the night of August 25, 2020. He said that he went there to prevent vandalism and provide medical aid. A jury of his peers correctly ruled that he acted in self-defense when he killed two men.

Under Wisconsin law, individuals have the right to self-defense and may use it if they reasonably believe “that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm” to themselves.

Unfortunately, the predictable left-wing reaction to the verdict threatens to undermine our legal system.

SEE ALSO: WATCH – Reasonable and Awful Takes on the Rittenhouse Verdict

However, Coffee’s case also raised salient questions about the right to self-defense and whether laws need to be reevaluated.

As Reason.com reports:

Andrew Coffee IV was charged with the attempted murder of a law enforcement officer and the felony murder of Coffee’s girlfriend, Alteria Woods. Deputies with the Indian River County Sheriff’s Office shot Woods 10 times during a drug raid in 2017 targeting Coffee’s father. The younger Coffee allegedly opened fire on deputies when they burst into his room that evening, having been awoken by the commotion and thinking the cops were an intruder. Deputies fired back, killing Woods.

Under the felony murder rule, the government may charge someone with killing someone he didn’t actually kill if it’s somehow connected to a tangential offense. Had Coffee not tried to defend himself that evening, the government argued, the officers would never have shot at them in return. Therefore, Coffee was supposedly guilty of murdering his partner.

Ultimately, the jury acquitted Coffee on both the attempted murder and felony murder charges. “I was trying to protect me and Alteria, and I thought I was doing that,” Coffee said after the verdict.

To recap, police officers in Coffee’s case smashed his bedroom window in a drug raid he was proven to have nothing to do with, accidentally killed his girlfriend (although that reportedly happened after Coffee shot three times) and tried to lock him up under the rule of felony murder.

The Indian River County Sheriff’s Office maintains that the officers involved identified themselves and did nothing wrong.

Regardless, Coffee still faces the possibility of 30 years behind bars. Although found not guilty of the most serious charges, the jury convicted him on the charge of being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm.

Following the verdict, Assistant State Attorney Chris Taylor declared that “The state will be seeking that maximum 30 years upon him.”

Meanwhile, the weapons charge in Rittenhouse’s case was thrown out by the court after it became clear the prosecutors misconstrued the statute. Though falsehoods and misunderstandings about that development still abound, it is indeed legal for a 17-year-old in Wisconsin to be in possession of a firearm so long as it is not short-barreled. Choruses for harsher laws ironically came from liberals who otherwise champion reform.

SEE ALSO: Vulnerable Democrat Fundraising With Group Tied to the Defund Police Movement

Was Coffee justified in defending himself? And should felons permanently lose their Second Amendment rights? As always, tell us your thoughts in the comments below!

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.

Related Posts

Comments are closed.