Kc.38 said:
From what I see in the video the perp never pointer his gun at Nazir...
Nazir had to come out from cover to get a clear shot at the robber so to me it appears that he was not in as much danger at that time as the other shoppers.
Doesn't matter. The same statute which protects acts in self-defense [939.48] also protects acts in defense of others, if the actor reasonably believed that the other was allowed to act in his/her own defense.
http://docs.legis.wi.gov/statutes/statutes/939/III/48
939.48(4) said:
A person is privileged to defend a 3rd person from real or apparent unlawful interference by another under the same conditions and by the same means as those under and by which the person is privileged to defend himself or herself from real or apparent unlawful interference, provided that the person reasonably believes that the facts are such that the 3rd person would be privileged to act in self-defense and that the person's intervention is necessary for the protection of the 3rd person.
Kc.38 said:
Would Nazir still have been cleared of any wrongdoing if the BG had returned fire and killed one or more shoppers?
The law says yes, in most cases. There are some exceptions, but in reading the descriptions I think there are only 3 which might be tried, & those are a stretch.
939.48(3) said:
The privilege of self-defense extends not only to the intentional infliction of harm upon a real or apparent wrongdoer, but also to the unintended infliction of harm upon a 3rd person,
except
that if the unintended infliction of harm amounts to the crime of first-degree or 2nd-degree reckless homicide, homicide by negligent handling of dangerous weapon, explosives or fire, first-degree or 2nd-degree reckless injury or injury by negligent handling of dangerous weapon, explosives or fire, the actor is liable for whichever one of those crimes is committed.
940.02 First-degree reckless homicide
nope
"recklessly causes the death of another human being under circumstances which show utter disregard for human life"
940.06 Second-degree reckless homicide
might be tried
"recklessly causes the death of another human being"
940.08 Homicide by negligent handling of dangerous weapon
nope
"causes the death of another human being by the negligent operation or handling of a dangerous weapon"
940.23 Reckless injury
first-degree "recklessly causes great bodily harm to another human being under circumstances which show utter disregard for human life"
nope
2nd-degree "recklessly causes great bodily harm to another human being" (or fetus)
might be tried
940.24 injury by negligent handling of dangerous weapon
might be tried
"whoever causes bodily harm to another by the negligent operation or handling of a dangerous weapon"
Most likely, the criminal would be charged with the additional crime of felony murder & have an extra 15 years on his sentence.
940.03 said:
Felony murder. Whoever causes the death of another human being while committing or attempting to commit ... [a list of crimes, including]
943.10 (2) [burglary while armed] ... may be imprisoned for not more than 15 years in excess of the maximum term of imprisonment provided by law for that crime or attempt.
The annotations under that statute include these:
State v. Oimen said:
To prove that the defendant caused the death, the state need only prove that the defendant's conduct was a substantial factor... A defendant may be convicted if another person, including an intended felony victim, fires the fatal shot.
State v. Below said:
An actor causes death if his or her conduct is a substantial factor in bringing about that result.
A substantial factor need not be the sole cause of death for one to be held legally culpable.
-