Untitled

Advocacy of the Imperfect Self-defense Theory for Nondeadly aggressors in U.S. Criminal Law

“…The 1882 Reed case in Texas was the first case to propose the doctrine of imperfect self-defense. The judge, in that case, stated that when an actor, through the fault of his own, creates a situation in which he must use deadly force in defense, then the law should limit his right to self-defense based on the extent of his fault, and this limited self-defense becomes an imperfect right of self-defense 4 . The rule was later refined in the Texas case of Franklin.…”

“…The rationale for the doctrine of imperfect self-defense is that the initial defender who defends himself with excessive force against violence from the aggressor is at fault and thereby gives the aggressor the legal right to fight against him with deadly force [4]. Some scholars have also looked to the antisocial nature of this defensive act, arguing that the law provides for different levels of crimes and penalties according to the different levels of antisociality of the actor, and therefore an aggressor who meets this condition should be more logically charged with voluntary manslaughter rather than murder because he does not have the same antisocial attributes as someone who commits murder with malice [5].…”