Reid by kicking him in the shoulder and head. Decatur also told the jury that when the bystanders attended to Reid, he was choking on his own blood. Based on this evidence alone, a reasonable juror could have inferred that Carlock formed the requisite specific intent to commit voluntary manslaughter. See Salmon, 944 F.2d at 1113. 2. Whether the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to disprove Oarlock’s self-defense claim beyond a reasonable doubt a. Self-defense To place self-defense at issue, Carlock offered evidence that he reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from which he could save himself only by using deadly force. See Gov’t of the Virgin Islands v. Isaac, 50 F.3d 1175, 1179 (3d Cir. 1995) (citing V.I. CODE. Ann. tit. 14, § 43) (<HOLDING>). Here, trial testimony revealed that Reid,
holding that a military police officer was entitled to qualified immunity from an excessive force suit when he objectively reasonably believed that he used reasonable force holding that a defendant charged with voluntary manslaughter would be entitled to an acquittal on the ground of selfdefense if he reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from which he could save himself only by using deadly force holding that when selfdefense is carried out with excessive force a defendant would be guilty of manslaughter holding that an officer cannot use deadly force unless a suspect poses an imminent threat of serious physical harm holding defendant who discharged firearm into empty residence could be convicted of aggravated assault if he acted with intent to cause serious bodily injury to person he believed was in residence even though that person was elsewhere