Attorneys React to Self-Defense in Halloween Movies! - 2A Roundup October 2024
Featuring Attorneys Brittany LaBerry, Rachel Moss, and Emma Wittmann
October 31, 2024
Would the actions of these horror film victims be justified in court? Criminal defense attorneys Rachel Moss, Emma Wittmann, and Brittany LaBerry dive into iconic Halloween films: The Shining, Halloween, The Karate Kid, and Joker, applying real-world self-defense principles to the movies. From proportionality to imminence, reasonableness, and defending others, they explore whether these cinematic reactions would hold up in court.
THE SHINNING
In the clip, Jack Torrance appears to have lost his sanity and is attempting to break into the bathroom with an axe, where his wife Wendy is hiding. After smashing a hole in the door, he reaches through to unlock it, but Wendy slashes his hand with a knife.
The attorneys agree that Jack’s violent actions and threats indicate an intent to kill, making the threat to Wendy imminent. Under these circumstances, she was justified in using proportionate force to defend herself. As attorney Moss notes, Wendy was not required to wait for Jack to fully break in before acting in self-defense.
HALLOWEEN
In the scene, Michael Myers escaped from a mental health facility and is later shown at the home of a babysitter named Lori. Michael attacks Lori, prompting the children in her care to flee the house. As they run out, the doctor from the mental facility who happens to be nearby sees the children and rushes inside. Upon entering, he witnesses Michael strangling Lori. The doctor intervenes by drawing his firearm and shooting Michael Myers five times.
The attorneys conclude the doctor’s use of deadly force is justified under the doctrine of defense of others. Michael was strangling Lori, posing an immediate threat to her life. However, a potential legal grey area arises from the number of shots fired. After the initial shot, Michael ceased his attack which raises the question of whether continued shooting was necessary. Nevertheless, the doctor’s actions could still be considered legally defensible, depending on whether his response is deemed “reasonable” under the circumstances. The attorneys point out that reasonableness is judged from the perspective of someone in the heat of the moment, and not with the benefit of hindsight.
KARATE KID
After pulling a prank on Johnny at a Halloween party, Daniel attempts to flee but is pursued by Johnny and his friends. When Daniel is unable to escape over a fence, Johnny and his group attack him. At that moment, Mr. Miyagi intervenes, using his karate skills to protect Daniel from the attack.
The attorneys find that, although Daniel initiated the conflict with a prank, he attempted to retreat from the situation. Once he was disengaged and tried to escape, Johnny and his friends were no longer legally justified in pursuing and attacking him. Their response became excessive and immediate, creating a situation where Daniel had the legal right to defend himself. Mr. Miyagi, was also within his rights to intervene in Daniel’s defense. Importantly, Mr. Miyagi used non-lethal force —karate— to defuse the situation. Had he resorted to deadly force without the attackers having done the same, his actions may not have been legally justified. What may begin as a joke can quickly spiral into violence, potentially invoking legal consequences or justified self-defense claims.
“If a person reasonably interprets that you have a weapon on you and you are trying to use that against them to harm them even if that person is wrong in their belief, they’re mistaken, they can still act in self-defense”
JOKER
In the clip, Arthur Fleck “Joker” is attacked by three men on the subway with no one else in sight. Unable to defend himself, he shoots them with his gun but the third man escapes. Arthur pursues the third man out of the train eventually shooting him multiple times.
The attorneys believe that Arthur was initially justified in using his firearm, as he faced an immediate threat and was outnumbered by multiple assailants. However, he should have ceased fire after neutralizing the first two men, as the third individual had already begun to retreat. By pursuing the third man, Arthur escalated the situation, turning what may have started as self-defense into an excessive and potentially unlawful use of force. Additionally, the attorneys note that firearm possession laws vary by state. Even if Arthur’s actions were legally defensible in terms of self-defense, he could still face charges if he was not lawfully permitted to carry the firearm in the first place.
As Halloween night ends, attorneys Rachel, Emma, and Brittany remind you: keep pranks safe, don’t carry realistic-looking weapons, and avoid brandishing props in public.
If you are seeking legal protection for self-defense related incidents, please call 866-404-5112 or email us to learn more about our Attorneys On Retainers Program.
Related Content
