Jenin Younes

So if you're just completely exaggerating the nature of the threat, you might not be able to succeed.

So one thing that's taken into consideration is whether you sort of played a role in getting to the point where someone was using the deadly physical force.

So his conduct prior to what happened could factor in.

Now I think from watching the video many, many times that he was not in harm's way when he fired the shots.

It looks to me as though his feet were clearly planted on the left.

And so when he fired the shots, the vehicle was driving away.

And it was clear.

I mean, it was very clear to me that her intent was to drive away, not to run him over, even if he did get hit.

Whether he was hit?

Yes.

Not really, no.

Because really the only question is whether he was afraid for his life when he fired the shots or serious physical injury.

And in fact, the fact that he was hit, if I were the prosecutor, I would actually use that to say it shows he was angry.

And the fact he said, fucking bitch.

I don't know if I can swear.

A fucking bitch afterwards again is sort of corroborative evidence that he was angry, not scared.

Not afraid.

So even if he could get away with a justification defense, even if he could convince a jury for the first shot, you have to show that you were justified for each use of deadly physical force.

So you can't just, you know, once you've done it the first time, if that threat no longer exists, you have to stop.

And I don't see how he could possibly convince anybody with a second and third chance.