The mainstream media have a narrative they will project and protect until their dying days when it comes to the average citizen using a gun for self-defense. The best defensive gun uses, the ones that are clean and pure as the wind-driven snow, will be buried at the earliest opportunity. Meanwhile the media will exploit the others for sensationalism value and to further their anti-gun and just-call-911 narratives.
The media especially love to swarm and feed like piranha when the attacker’s family comes out to call foul after their relative has been shot, or if there’s the possibility of exploiting a racial component.
Pro-tip: If you’re ever involved in a defensive gun use, do not talk with the media. Do not invite them into your home. Do not take calls from them or sit down with them. It’s simple really. Do. Not. Talk. To. The. Media.
Their story is already written and an interview with you will only dial up the sensationalism. It’ll also give them a chance to portray you, the victim, as a trigger-happy murdering redneck. Or worse.
Take the recent case of James Rayl of Sydney, Ohio.
Young Mr. Rayl couldn’t accept a “no” from his ex-girlfriend after the couple broke up. So one Sunday morning, when he should have been at church singing hymns and praising Jesus, he instead went to the ex-girlfriend’s home.
At the front door, he was told that the girl didn’t want to talk to him. The girl’s father told Mr. Rayl that if he forced entry, he would be shot.
Rayl apparently didn’t care…or didn’t believe the warning. He put his shoulder into the front door and after about five or six impacts, the door jam shattered into splinters and swung open. That’s when the girl’s father fired three rounds.
All three rounds struck Mr. Rayl, the third one entering his back. Rayl wobbled out to the driveway where he laid down and died.
There’s Ring doorbell video of all of this. One of the most-comprehensive videos is this one . . .
How did NBC News report on this story? Look at chyron on the bottom of the screen.
They described Rayl’s violent forced entry as “…attempting to push door open.” As if he was just a pesky door-to-door vacuum salesman. As if he hadn’t been explicitly warned before successfully breaching the front door of the home.
Here’s their report, titled, “Ohio Man Fatally Shoots Daughter’s Ex After He Attempts To Break In.”
What did NBC News not share with their viewers?
He just “attempted to push the door open.”
Again, as Rayl approached the front door, the family dialed 9-1-1 for help. But as we all know, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. Those inside the home told Rayl that his ex didn’t want to talk to him. They told him to leave. They warned him not to try to enter. Dad told Rayl that if he forced his way in, dad would shoot him.
Yet despite all that, at 11a.m. on a Sunday morning, Rayl made the fateful decision to force entry and was shot.
Then there’s the neighbor who came over to offer his two cents, asking why they shot the intruder. “He doesn’t have a gun,” the neighbor said a couple of times. As if the homeowner knew that or it makes it okay to break down down someone’s door.
The local stations grabbed video from police bodycams and incorporated that into their stories, showing the victim’s family in the immediate aftermath of the incident.
Fanning the flames, the late Mr. Rayl’s family set up a “Justice for James Rayl” Facebook page and has held some protests. However, they aren’t getting a lot of traction or many posts lately. Most who have seen the video have a pretty clear view of who was the aggressor and who was the defender.
With all of the publicity, the victim family has put their house on the market as they’re seeking to relocate. Can you blame them?
If you’re involved in a self-defense incident, you may see that video from the incident on YouTube or the local news station. So be extra careful what you say and who or what can overhear it.
We’ve covered strategies for talking with responding and investigating officers in the aftermath of a self-defense use-of-force incident. Suffice it to say, keep your mouth shut as much as possible. Talk with your attorney, and only your attorney. Don’t say anything to your family members that can be overheard by police body cameras.
As always, we recommend subscribing to one of the legal programs that will provide a legal team for your defense. US Law Shield is one of the biggest in the nation. There’s also Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network and US Concealed Carry Association to name a couple of others.
I carry both US Law Shield and Armed Citizens. Why both? Because US Law Shield defends you in red flag hearings and their Illinois attorney is based North of I-80, which is probably the most likely place I’d have to pull a trigger in self-defense. Meanwhile, Armed Citizens lets me hire my criminal defense team and I have a relationship with a large, regional firm that does outstanding criminal defense work. They think I’m a rock star for my help with a murder trial they successfully handled for an acquittal. I appreciate them for their masterful work in court.
Your mileage may vary in terms of needs and relationships, so pick the company and plan that works best for your needs.
Just remember this: there’s absolutely, positively NOTHING to be gained – for you at least – from talking with the media after a situation such as this. Nothing.
This sums it up nicely for both the media, and the authorities.
https://youtu.be/RbhOskUoG44
I think the father acted entirely appropriately. No one, including law enforcement has the right to break into your home without a valid warrant. Most states consider your home your inviolate domain and allow you to protect yourself and family exactly the way this father did.
We have enough of these psychos roaming around today and there is no surprise why over a million people a month are buying firearms to protect themselves and their families.
dprato,
“I think the father acted entirely appropriately.”
As you well know, naysayers will say otherwise.
Here are some simple and indisputable facts:
The deceased was 22 years-old and appeared to be reasonably physically fit.
This event occurred July 31st at 11:00 a.m. in Sidney, Ohio. It was a bright sunny day, the temperature was just shy of 80 degrees and humid (according to local weather stations), and the deceased was wearing a baggy hooded sweatshirt. That is very suspicious.
The deceased could have easily had a knife, pick, firearm, or even a short bludgeon on his body under his sweatshirt.
The deceased rang the doorbell and refused to leave after the family told him to leave. The deceased then escalated to impacting the door–apparently attempting to breach the door–and refused to leave when the family told him that they had a firearm and he must leave.
In my world those simple facts establish that the home occupants had a reasonable fear that the deceased intended to maim and/or murder them as soon as he breached their door.
And there is another dimension to this event assuming that the daughter had not had any relationship with the deceased for over a year as the story claims. The deceased came to their home, rang their doorbell, refused to leave, and then attempted to breach the door: those are the actions of a stalker. Stalkers are notorious for violently beating, maiming, and/or murdering their victims. I believe that increases the danger of that event and further justifies the father’s use of deadly force.
James Rayl can’t say he wasn’t warned!
Stuck on stupid home invader who did not understand the word “no” got what he asked for. Relationships can turn on a dime and when they do stfu, pack up and head the other way. Easy peasy.
I would have shot him too under the same conditions.
Play stupid games – win stupid prizes!
If necessary jury nullification.
I have no problem shooting the bastard boyfriend. Then again look at 2020 when they made a saint out of a drug addled ex-con(who held a knife on a pregnant woman’s neck).
Degeneracy in all its forms unfortunately is becoming a normalized. All across this country. We are in grave Danger.
Well, yeah. The establishment media has ALWAYS been the enemies of the people. Even in America with our 1st Amendment there has always been power blocks that set themselves up as the mouth piece for establishment. Luckily, with the technology we have now it’s getting harder and harder for the MSM to dominate the media landscape. Even if big-tech are fighting tooth and nail to make that not be the case.
The media is not for friend either way.
James Rayl Looks a lot like David Hogg ……
Andrew Branca went over this case pretty well with a former FBI interrogator (who isn’t an America-hating jerk).
I’m convinced the shooter did nothing wrong except for one thing. He spoke to a police detective without a lawyer. Really, really, dumb. They played a portion of his conversation, I didn’t see anything glaring but they didn’t show the whole thing and I wasn’t paying attention like a prosecutor would be. Never, ever speak to a detective without a lawyer.
Just accept that you’ll almost certainly be arrested in that case, which can be a pretty big deal in and of itself.
I’m not saying shutting up is a bad idea- but there have been multiple cases where someone was obviously justified and making that clear immediately avoided it. Shutting up is certainly the best option when in doubt, though.
I subscribe to the Branca/Mas Ayoob school of thought here – don’t shut up entirely to everyone ever. Definitely shut up to detectives, who aren’t there on the scene first. But those police who do arrive first, if you know about witnesses, evidence that might be crucial and not apparent, you need to point that out. You also need to emphasize that you are the victim. You must explain that you are the victim here. Be brief about it. That man attacked me, I had to defend myself. That’s it. Calling 911 is also talking to police, and that is something you should do. Ask for an ambulance on 911 if you shot someone. After the bare basics, tell police something like – I want to cooperate with you but this is a serious event, I really need to have my attorney with me.
If you don’t say a word, period, a prosecutor can make you look extremely cold-blooded and that you behaved like every other criminal out there. You want a jury on your side. Don’t give anyone any rope to hang you.
I’m not a lawyer and don’t remember the case. But no, they can’t legal hold your exercising of your rights against you in court.
In the Rittenhouse case the prosecution tried to argue to the jury that Rittenhouse refused to talk to the police. That is verboten and the judge instructed him not to go there and instructed the jury to disregard his comments. That, in the legal field, is called unringing the bell. It is long established law by the DC Supremes that the prosecution MAY NOT comment to the jury about the accused’s exercising his right against self-incrimination.
By the prosecution attempting to argue that to the jury when he, as a practicing attorney, knew what he was doing was a violation of ethics by deliberately doing that which is proscribed was grounds for a mistrial which the judge should have granted. By not granting that motion for mistrial, the judge automatically set grounds for reversal on appeal. I don’t know whether the judge did that inadvertently or deliberately. I am sure if it was deliberate, that will go to the grave with the judge. In any event, the jury did the right thing and acquitted Rittenhouse.
There were other things the prosecuting attorney did that, while not actually a violation of any rules, were low class. He charged two counts of 1st degree murder and I don’t remember if those were life without parole and also charge curfew violation, an infraction, much the same as a ticket for parking overtime at a parking meter. It’s called “throw enough fecal matter (insert appropriate Anglo-Saxon word) at the wall. Some of it is bound to stick.
Speaking to the cop didn’t cause a problem in that case, but he should have talked to a lawyer, yes.
The problem in this case was the deliberate bias of the media in mis-reporting it, leaving out critical details that exonerated the father’s actions, leading up to comments by the perpetrator’s family like “He was leaving, why shoot him in the back?”.
The way the Leftist Scum ™ *purposefully* chose to report that story was the problem. As a news organization, their job is to report facts, and they failed to do so.
That right there has parallels with the way the Travon Martin story was reported…
Can attest to the truth of this, citing from personal experience.
Shut. The. Fuck. Up. Any defense attorney worth anything you’ve ever heard say the same is right. They will twist anything you say, if not outright lie about what you said. Cost me 2 1/2 years, and $17k+ to extricate myself from their b.s. charges. That though it never even made it to court. Double or more if it had.
As Hannibal said below, be prepared to be arrested, despite what the law says, or that your part was wholly justified.
And I am in a super friendly to self defense state. Supposedly, my experience varied greatly from the prima facie claim.
You have no friends in authorities or media after ANY use of force no matter who you are.
Unless you are Alec Baldwin when it is perfectly all right to point a gun at an innocent person and pull the trigger, “Oops. My bad. They told me it was clear.”
I’ve had professional experience with the media tracking a story. If you see an interview unfolding, and both the interviewer, and the target are not on-screen at the same time, you would be wise to conclude what you are watching is manipulated to either support the target, or trash the target.
After a DGU, the media is NOT your friend. Your neighbors, who will turn on you in a heartbeat, are NOT your friends. The smiling cops are NOT your friends. The politicians are NOT your friends. The Soros-loving prosecutor is the enemy of everything good and NOT your friend.
Your friends are your family, your lawyer, and the insurance company that’s paying some of your legal bills.
The prosecutor’s goal is to railroad you, bankrupt you, or both. Justice doesn’t enter into the equation. Conduct yourself accordingly.
James Rayl got justice, what more does anyone want? Kick in a man’s door, you die, it’s really that simple.
I did it once and didn’t die. I went there with intentions of having a talk with someone and setting him straight. I knocked. He didn’t open the door. I lost my temper when he didn’t answer, kicked the door open and punched him in the face a few times until a friend stepped in and broke it up. That guy was a piece of excrement who deserved every bit of that and then some. I guess he could have legally shot and killed me. I didn’t even consider it at the time. It was stupid to even go over there. You could say I was doing stupid things.
“You could say I was doing stupid things.”
What other way could it possibly have been said?
Break through a locked door, expect to get shot dead, *full stop*… 🙁
Or if you’ve done something to someone how about facing the music like a man instead of hiding behind your locked door like a coward. My situation wasn’t like the news story. Just because something is legal doesn’t mean it’s right. Some people around here are nonchalant about killing. People should be aware of how trigger happy some people are. I was young and naive. I probably could have been legally killed even though it wasn’t necessary. I guess I would have if that was you. I would avoid that now. If anyone has lived then they’ve done something stupid before.
“Or if you’ve done something to someone how about facing the music like a man instead of hiding behind your locked door like a coward“
Funny, that’s what James Rayl said right before he forced entry.
Just read this. Late to the party. Everyone in my home is armed and trained. I don’t care what your excuse is tough guy you kick down our door you are going to the morgue.
CH,
“I went there with intentions of having a talk with someone and setting him straight. I knocked. He didn’t open the door. I lost my temper when he didn’t answer, kicked the door open and punched him in the face a few times until a friend stepped in and broke it up.”
You lost your temper–kicked in the door and punched the occupant in the face “a few times” until a friend broke it up.
Losing your temper and thus self-control–and requiring someone else to stop you–means that you were capable of anything, including grievous bodily harm or murder. Home occupants have zero ZERO obligation to trust in the good graces of someone who just breached their home.
Think about another dimension to your attack: what if the friend wasn’t there to break it up? Note that punching someone repeatedly in the face can easily cause permanent disability or death. Would you have continued punching the victim until he/she suffered permanent injury or died? And how was the victim of your attack supposed to know that you did not bring a knife or firearm–or that you would not pick up an object of opportunity and bludgeon the victim?
Your own statement highlights the very reason why the law in most states says that you have a reasonable fear of great bodily harm or death when someone breaches your home.
“kicked the door open and punched him in the face“
I hope he doesn’t own guns, sounds like he is just one “losing your temper” incident away from murder.
Wow you guys are really missing the point here. I posted that as a warning of what NOT to do. Go back to my comments. I said it was stupid to even go there and get put in that situation. And no uncommon_sense you don’t know me better than I know myself. I’m not capable of murder just because I got into a fight. Have you lived a sheltered life? People get into fights. Especially boys and young men. It was wrong for me to go there. It was wrong for me to kick his door in and punch him no matter what he did to me. Go ahead and pile on if it makes you feel better about yourself. It must be nice to be so pure.
Now for the rest of the story. He stole $2,000 from me. I had been calling him for months. He was avoiding me and hiding from me. I was going to talk to him man to man before I tried to sue him or go further with the police. (I never planned on fighting, even after I got into the house. It just happened. You guys think you know but you don’t. He was a punk.) I even had a signed contract with him. I thought I was safe. Recall I said I was young and naive. I actually thought people stood by their word, and especially a signed contract. When I went to the police, they put me in touch with someone else who he stole from. Contracts aren’t magic and the police don’t care that someone stole from you. Pursuing that takes a lot of time and I was very busy because instead of scamming people I worked for a living.
I never got my money back. He ended up dead by overdose within a year. I went on to raise a family and contribute to society. That’s the point I’m making. Tough guys like “Imaho” come on here to tell everyone how quickly they would end a life even if it wasn’t necessary. I made the point that it wasn’t necessary but the TTAG tough guy brigade still wants to tell how they would have shot me. Like I said, it was stupid. People could learn from this. If you guys are serious about educating people and changing hearts and minds instead of just preaching to the choir with the cheap applause lines, then you should keep people like “Imaho” locked in the basement. We get it. You guys are ready to kill at the drop of a hat. There’s also a reason non-gun people call you guys gun nuts.
To Miner49er, you’re contributing nothing as usual. I wasn’t stalking a girl. I was trying to reach the thief (a man) that had been evading me for months. I never even wanted to go to his house. (Keep in mind the police can legally do what I did except they can also shoot the dog.) The people in the house didn’t tell me they had a gun either. Any normal person would have left at that point. They never said anything. They were hiding hoping I would leave them be to go steal from someone else. Who knows how many other people he stole from before he died.
I suppose they could dig him up and shoot him again.
Ah, if only it were that simple, Paul. Lawyers make big bucks making simple things complicated. I worked for a judge once who, being assigned a divorce case always inquired how long the attorney expected to take the try the case. “One day? Doesn’t one of the parties want the divorce?”
“Oh, yes, Your Honor.”
“Well, what’s the problem?”
“Well, child support and visitation, Your Honor.”
“That’s easy. I’m going to order child support and allow visitation. Now what’s the problem?”
“Well, Your Honor, ah, ahem, ah. . .”
“Why don’t you gentlemen go out and talk to your clients and come back when you have reached a reasonable settlement.”
He didn’t believe in a lot of obfuscation. He thought the law should be clear and direct. A voice crying in the wilderness.
What’s really interesting is how ABC and other news outlets apparently now support domestic violence over women’s self defense. Who knew portraying a defensive gun event as “gun violence” is more important to the liberal media than actually standing up for the safety of women from clearly violent men like James Rayl.
After fight essex isn’t as good if your partner is dead.
Errr no, its 2023.
LGTBQ and N
The “news” media – experience professional liars (even more so than a demtard politician. They will whip you with experience no matter how earnest, truthful, and aggrieved you might be.
At this point, the way the media loves to go with the easiest and lazy story to set the narrative early, I’m starting to think having a media consultant in your contacts is about as important as having legal representation there.
“I’m starting to think having a media consultant in your contacts is about as important as having legal representation there.”
Sad, but true. If I was a person with any kind of a public presence I would seriously consider having such a service. Especially if I had business contacts I valued… 🙁
“Fanning the flames of the media coverage is the late Mr. Rayl’s family, who set up a “Justice for James Rayl” Facebook page…”
Reminds me of this :
🤣
After fight essex just ain’t as fun if your partner is dead.
.
Errrr ,Well Maybe it is, depending on your kink thing.
Minor point: Although the Stand Your Ground Law does apply, it should not be necessary. The assailant was forcibly breaking into their home. If they need a law to justify defending their lives, we really have lost too much ground from sanity as a nation.
Stand Your Ground laws were generally meant to clarify a legal concept which was muddled by various rulings. This case, as backed up by the video evidence, was too clear cut. What the hell did they expect?
I’m pretty sure the stand your ground law had nothing to do with this. They brought it up to conflate the issue to their audience because they’re propagandists.
The young man was stupid in a “no stupid zone”.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
This is the best advice given to me. Not talking to the media is a no brainer. What you say around your kids too, they might let a detail slip or an opinion come out that draws suspicion, but this is what most need to hear. For any interaction with law enforcement “I cannot answer any questions without my Attourney present.” Law enforcement gets a 72 hour cool down period before giving a statement after a shoot. You don’t need to tell your story while on adrenaline and fresh out of a very traumatic experience.
Call 911, report a shooting and the need for an ambulance. Don’t touch anything, holster or place the firearm on the floor, calmly wait for them to show (I’d have my hands on my head because pigs get trigger happy). Then don’t say a fucking thing except that you are invoking your 5th amendment rights and you’d like to talk to your lawyer before you answer any questions.
“Then don’t say a fucking thing except that you are invoking your 5th amendment rights and you’d like to talk to your lawyer before you answer any questions.”
‘In your experience, Detective Reagan, how often do innocent people demand a lawyer, before answering questions about a potential crime, and what, if any, conclusions do you draw from your experience???’
‘Objection! Detective cannot determine what is in a person’s mind’
‘Detective Reagan is certainly qualified to evaluate and report on his personal experience.’
Read my post above about the prosecutor being able to make comments or bring up the subject of the accused not speaking to the police. The prosecutor is forbidden to raise the topic and to do so is grounds for an immediate mistrial and sanctions against the prosecutor with the bar association or the judicial counsel.
I did read your commentary. No one, absolutely no one can “un-ring” the bell, at trial; the jury always hears.
How many judges take pleasure at declaring mistrials?
How many lawyers have been sanctioned for violating judicial notice, and canon of ethics? How many have been disbarred?
In an “officer involved” shooting, cops get three days of quiet contemplation to get their story straight with their attorneys. J.Q. Public might get the same three days of contemplation in a holding cell.
My comment is that the aftermath of a shooting is a crap shoot for the defender; you can be absolutely right, and still lose.
Don’t depend on righteousness to be a viable defense.
@Kellen September
“I’m not a lawyer and don’t remember the case. But no, they can’t legal hold your exercising of your rights against you in court.”
But yes, “they can”. Whether successfully or not, “they” can try. During self-defense class at LGS/range, local sheriff detective was explaining LE view of a shooting incident. He noted that if faced with reluctance to talk, he could simply write in his report, “individual was uncooperative”.
A defense attorney might be able to neutralize the testimony. However, you can’t un-hear testimony delivered at trial.
OBTW….family members can be deposed on what you say between the incident, and departure of the police (as in overhearing you statements before and after calling 911)
I am an exception, because I would naturally be righteous in my claim of self-defense, and don’t need no stinkin’ lawyer to advise me immediately. When you’re right, you’re right…and dat’s duh name of dat tune.
Well, Sam, I can only say that I hope you have a very good lawyer on retainer because you are going to need him. Read a book called “Bogus.” Read anything by Massad Ayoub who makes his living going around trying to save folks with your attitude from themselves when they are in the defendant’s chair in a courtroom.
Read anything by lawyers for any of the self-defense insurance firms. You don’t need no stinking’ lawyer because you are innocent? Can you say David Rittenhouse?
One of the most significant factors in his defense was his adamant refusal to talk to the cops. It doesn’t matter if the cops think you are guilty. They are not the ones going to be sitting in the jury box. Sure you might spend the night in jail until you can reach a lawyer but that is better than twenty to life or even the death penalty.
It is hard for me to believe that you can possibly entertain the notion that having nothing to hide it is okay to talk to the cops. I spent twenty-five years working in court. I know how the police and the prosecuting attorneys work. I know how they threaten you with arresting your spouse and having your kids taken by the Kiddy Gestapo known as CPS. Sometimes they also arrest and charge your spouse and use the fact that your kids are languishing in juvenile detention and they will prosecute your spouse too if you don’t cop a plea. Why do you think General Flynn pled guilty to a bogus charge? It was because the federal prosecutors threatened to charge his son. He had to foot his legal bill himself. A general may make big bucks but he doesn’t make enough to be able to afford a criminal defense in federal court. And he is too “wealthy” to qualify for the federal public defender who would work out a good deal for him and he would have to reimburse them after he wound up with more than he got anyway.
You really need to lose your rose colored glasses about the court system. I hope you noticed that not once did I talk about justice. The US court system is not about justice. it is about convictions and keeping judges and lawyers steadily employed.
“You really need to lose your rose colored glasses about the court system. ”
Hi,
Did you read more than the last para of my comment? I am skeptical of “the system” at any level, or any moment. The issue of talk/don’t talk to police is not a simple, binary proposition. Even Masood, an Baranca won’t guarantee that talking, or not talking will be the best tactic in any given situation.
What if the judge allows the DA to criticize silence? The case might still proceed, providing an avenue for appeal. But who, in the case at bar, will be harmed meanwhile?
Reference my comment, “… the aftermath of a shooting is a crap shoot for the defender; you can be absolutely right, and still lose.”
You can’t fix stupid but sometimes it takes care of itself by playing stupid games. But really, even the local paper (which is owned by USA Today) in the small city I live in has gotten ‘woke’ and liberal. I cancelled by subscription and told them why. It is a shame that media can no longer report unbiasedly on news stories. It has to fit a narrative or agenda they support.
“It has to fit a narrative or agenda they support.”
As it has always been. “The power of the press belongs to ‘he’ who owns one.” A look through news outlet history is fascinating. What you are seeing today is still tame in many respects.
There is a great video by a YouTuber called Dreading on this case. I’m watching it now and so far he seems to take your side on things. I also do. I agree the media sucks and the family of James is going through the worst thing imaginable and with the media feeding narratives that help to feed them anger in a time of extreme grief it can me a wildly addictive sideshow to keep you out the depths. It’s sad because it’s a terrible situation that everyone wants to give their two cents in and say what they would do but you just don’t know until it happens to you. The father was protecting his family. It’s disgusting the way people are talking about his daughter saying she is smiling in police interrogation video… same for the father like they are living it.. but you watch it and know that’s not the case. It’s sad that James’s sister is left being pulled in so many directions it’s hard to fault her for saying the things she is saying. It’s wrong of her but if someone killed my family I would go completely ape shit. I wouldn’t be a reasonable person and I would want them dead. Even if it was my family’s fault cause that’s how feelings work. She should be left to work through them and help out of that mindset instead you get shitty media scum feeding her what she wishes was true and it’s so ugly.
Comments are closed.