Part I: Outline the requirements of self-defense and explain what they mean (good faith belief, imminent danger, threat of harm, proportionate use of force to repel attack). Consider the difference between the reasonable person standard and how that may contrast with the subjective evaluation of the person who invokes a claim of self-defense. Give examples of how those differences may become obscure depending upon the facts and circumstances of a particular case (E.g., the man who claims self-defense against an opponent of like size, age, and physical characteristics, as contrasted with the 95 pound woman who is confronted by a 200 pound attacker.)

Part II: Find the law in your state that deals with offenses against the person, defenses, and the use of deadly force. Are these concepts statutorily defined? Are they in the nature of an affirmative defense, or does a presumption arise if certain facts and circumstances exist?

Research the case of Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). Provide the factual background of the case, the procedural history, and the issues and analysis confronted by the court in dealing with the issue on when a law enforcement officer may use deadly force. Are the guidelines set by the court clear, or do they provide a less then bright line standard that a law enforcement officer must decide upon in a split second?

 

could you let me know the website you used