Most people in the US are reassured by the knowledge that they can always secure themselves in one of two means: either through the protection of law enforcement officers or through self-defense.
For many individuals, self-defense is a less-than-ideal scenario for a multitude of reasons. Firstly, it is difficult to enact. When a person is attacked without proper training, they can feel like a deer in the headlights and become paralyzed. What’s more, even when they react to the threat there is a good chance that the assaulter is more prepared to do damage than the victim. Many options exist to overcome this first obstacle in self-defense, such as classes and seminars on various physical techniques.
The darker side of self-defense is when an individual has to use firearms or other weaponry to protect themselves, especially when it leads to a fatality. In the past, killing a person who was threatening your own life was permissible in virtually every state around the world, and particularly in the United States. However, the past few years have seen cases of alleged self-defense where individuals were incarcerated for protecting themselves and their families. The question that remains is whether or not self-defense remains as a legitimate reason for performing a fatality.
One of the most heart-breaking stories of the inadequacy of self-defense laws was presented in the case of John McNeil. He was a loving husband, father of two, and up-and-coming businessman. To his family, friends, and neighbors, McNeil was the epitome of what an American citizen should be.
On December 6th, 2005, McNeil received a worrying phone call from his son, then 19, stating that the contractor they had previously hired was lurking in the yard. McNeil immediately rushed home, making a 9-1-1 call as he did so. Once he arrived at home, he saw that the contractor, Brian Epp, had made his way into the home. Epp refused to leave despite being asked multiple times by McNeil. In addition, McNeil fired a warning shot to state his intent in protecting his family.
According to McNeil’s family and eye witnesses (the neighboring couple), Epp charged McNeil, reaching into his pocket as he did so. At this time, McNeil felt threatened enough to shoot and ultimately killed Epp. A later examination concluded that Epp had a knife in the pocket he was reaching into.
At first it appeared as if McNeil’s actions would be accepted as self-defense, since the Kennesaw police detectives did not file a case against him. However, he was prosecuted by the DA 274 days later and convicted. The case was unusual because it seemed like the law should have been on McNeil’s side. The state of Georgia has a law, known as the ‘Castle Doctrine,’ which allows individuals to protect themselves with a weapon if they feel threatened on their property. In addition, the law does not state that a situation has to escalate for the landowner to use his weapon.
The DA did not accept this regulation, comparing it to the ‘Stand Your Ground’ law found in the state of Florida. However, the two rules are completely different. ‘Stand Your Ground’ allows an individual to use violence any time they feel threatened, promoting rash action and racial profiling, whereas the Castle Doctrine protects individuals in the sanctity of their homes.
John McNeil was a family man, helped in the community, had no criminal record, and had eye-witnesses supporting him, yet he was still sent to prison for life. What makes his story even more tragic is that his wife is terminally ill with cancer, and she fears she won’t see him free before he dies. The issue of mortality was raised once more when McNeil’s mother died one month ago.
A Supreme Court appeal failed, with only one Justice supporting McNeil. He has now filed a Habeas Corpus plea with the Georgia Superior Court. If it fails, his last option is to file a clemency request with the Board of Pardons and Paroles in Georgia.