Apple River (U.S.) Stabbing Self-Defense Case: Verdict Guilty of Murder

[marvin8]

Today 4/11/24, a jury found Nicolae Miu guilty of one count of first-degree reckless homicide, four counts of first-degree recklessly endangering safety and one count of battery. Interesting and important as public opinion seemed to be split.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I don't have an opinion one way or another, but I will point out that whether one is justified or not in using deadly force, one's life does not get easier afterwards. I'm not saying not to defend yourself. I'm saying be aware of what comes with it. Even if he'd been found not guilty, his life is wrecked, and a young person is dead.

 

[Holmejr]

I don't have an opinion one way or another, but I will point out that whether one is justified or not in using deadly force, one's life does not get easier afterwards. I'm not saying not to defend yourself. I'm saying be aware of what comes with it. Even if he'd been found not guilty, his life is wrecked, and a young person is dead.

Truth.
In class we have this talk on a regular basis.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

Autonomous self-defense (standing your ground) is controversial, and stabbing is even more controversial.

I listened a bit, and I’m going to guess, that a lack of expressed intent to retreat, did NOT help him.

Today 4/11/24, a jury found Nicolae Miu guilty of one count of first-degree reckless homicide, four counts of first-degree recklessly endangering safety and one count of battery. Interesting and important as public opinion seemed to be split.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

Today 4/11/24, a jury found Nicolae Miu guilty of one count of first-degree reckless homicide, four counts of first-degree recklessly endangering safety and one count of battery. Interesting and important as public opinion seemed to be split.

Taking what’s shown in the highlights at face value, this seems like a tragic mutual escalation by both parties, that ultimately led to death.

Miu is at a disadvantage, not having mastery of English. The prosecutor seems to be taking full advantage of it, and I’m surprised the judge is letting him get away with that.

 

[marvin8]

Autonomous self-defense (standing your ground) is controversial, and stabbing is even more controversial.

A minority of states impose a legal duty to retreat, avoidance, that is one of up to 5 elements prosecutors in the U.S. may need to disprove.

With opportunity, a weapon (e.g., a knife) is considered deadly force. Stabbing with a knife makes you the initial aggressor when escalating a fist fight into a deadly force fight without other aggravating factors.

I listened a bit, and I’m going to guess, that a lack of expressed intent to retreat, did NOT help him.

Avoidance was one element looked at by the jury and others. However, public views were split.

At 49:51, Branca covers WI law on avoidance.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

A minority of states impose a legal duty to retreat, avoidance, that is one of up to 5 elements prosecutors in the U.S. may need to disprove.

With opportunity, a weapon (e.g., a knife) is considered deadly force. Stabbing with a knife makes you the initial aggressor when escalating a fist fight into a deadly force fight without other aggravating factors.


Avoidance was one element looked at by the jury and others. However, public views were split.

At 49:51, Branca covers WI law on avoidance.

Last time I checked, group or mob violence is considered disproportionate force under US law, which given the events described, could be argued. Thus, I don’t see a clear case, one way or the other, beyond maybe failure to retreat.

 

[marvin8]

Last time I checked, group or mob violence is considered disproportionate force under US law, which given the events described, could be argued.

The defense tried to sell the narrative that Miu was subject to "mob violence" and defended himself. However, the jury of 12 found otherwise and delivered a guilty of murder verdict. Miu will spend 67 years or the rest of his life in prison.

Thus, I don’t see a clear case, one way or the other, beyond maybe failure to retreat.

Again in WI, "There is no duty to retreat." Therefore, the other 4 elements were more of a factor in this WI self-defense case.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

The defense tried to sell the narrative that Miu was subject to "mob violence" and defended himself. However, the jury of 12 found otherwise and delivered a guilty of murder verdict. Miu will spend 67 years or the rest of his life in prison.


Again in WI, "There is no duty to retreat." Therefore, the other 4 elements were more of a factor in this WI self-defense case.

Understood. Given what he said on the stand, it sounds like his defense team wasn’t that great. He was not particularly articulate, seemingly not prepped. He kept repeating “I was in fear for my life,” but anyone who’s made any effort studying US self-defense law knows that phrase alone is empty. Whats more is how the prosecutor engaged in wordplay, and Miu could not keep up. His lawyer at least called him out on it, but the judge overruled.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

The defense tried to sell the narrative that Miu was subject to "mob violence" and defended himself. However, the jury of 12 found otherwise and delivered a guilty of murder verdict. Miu will spend 67 years or the rest of his life in prison.


Again in WI, "There is no duty to retreat." Therefore, the other 4 elements were more of a factor in this WI self-defense case.

Don’t know all the details, but allegedly he screwed up the initial and follow up interviews with police, inconsistent story. I’m guessing stabbing, that, and that a teenager died were the determining factors in this case.

 

[marvin8]

Understood. Given what he said on the stand, it sounds like his defense team wasn’t that great.

Attorney Corey Chirafisi and the defense team were praised by other attorneys for their representation of Miu. Corey Chirafisi successfully defended Rittenhouse in his claim of self-defense. Attorney and self-defense law instructor Andrew Branca was saying Miu should be found not guilty under the law, (As a lay person, I would have found Miu guilty.)

He was not particularly articulate, seemingly not prepped. He kept repeating “I was in fear for my life,” but anyone who’s made any effort studying US self-defense law knows that phrase alone is empty.

Yes. Miu said he feared for this life. However, he arguably provoked the fight by punching or slapping the girl first losing his right to claim self-defense. Then, other unarmed groups defended her by punching and pushing him. Miu escalated and retaliated using deadly force with his knife.

Don’t know all the details, but allegedly he screwed up the initial and follow up interviews with police, inconsistent story.

Yes. Miu threw his knife away in the bushes, lied to the police at the scene and police station and lied in cross-examination. Because of that, I don't believe he was in imminent fear of death.

I’m guessing stabbing, that, and that a teenager died were the determining factors in this case.

Miu is the aggressor losing his right to claim self-defense, lies, was not reasonably in fear of imminent death, escalates an unarmed fight with a deadly weapon and stabs and kills unarmed people. IMO the evidence disproves the four elements (in WI) needed in Miu's claim to self-defense: innocence, imminence, proportionality and reasonableness.

You only need to disprove ONE element of the up to five elements to defeat a claim of self-defense. While the elements themselves are relatively simple, applying them to a real-world case can be complicated.

 

[Buka]

Such a foolish waste of life and freedom.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

Attorney Corey Chirafisi and the defense team were praised by other attorneys for their representation of Miu. Corey Chirafisi successfully defended Rittenhouse in his claim of self-defense. Attorney and self-defense law instructor Andrew Branca was saying Miu should be found not guilty under the law, (As a lay person, I would have found Miu guilty.)


Yes. Miu said he feared for this life. However, he arguably provoked the fight by punching or slapping the girl first losing his right to claim self-defense. Then, other unarmed groups defended her by punching and pushing him. Miu escalated and retaliated using deadly force with his knife.

Yes. Miu threw his knife away in the bushes, lied to the police at the scene and police station and lied in cross-examination. Because of that, I don't believe he was in imminent fear of death.


Miu is the aggressor losing his right to claim self-defense, lies, was not reasonably in fear of imminent death, escalates an unarmed fight with a deadly weapon and stabs and kills unarmed people. IMO the evidence disproves the four elements (in WI) needed in Miu's claim to self-defense: innocence, imminence, proportionality and reasonableness.

You only need to disprove ONE element of the up to five elements to defeat a claim of self-defense. While the elements themselves are relatively simple, applying them to a real-world case can be complicated.

The Rittenhouse case was relatively straightforward. Footage clearly showed adult males rush him, called for a crowd to “get him,” attempt to kick his head in, attempt to bludgeon him, and pull guns on him. And then him turning himself into the police.

The evidence with this case is not straightforward. The hard evidence is shaky cam footage, and the rest is witness testimony.

All I can say is—Miu should have walked away when he had the chance. I would have left immediately the moment things became confrontational, and the group was rallied. Whatever he was there for, it wasn’t worth “standing his ground.”