ya know
I went back and read that statute. I will admit that after doing so it appears that " per how its written" she was seemingly justified.

how ever i stand by what I also said. for one it says perceived offender. whos to say that the person driving automatically gets labeled as the offender? if thats the case then i would believe this was written because the third party was being kidnapped or was in harms way. Not that I am in anyways an expert but i can say this. Ive taken the cc class 3 times. The last time was May and the legal part was done by an attorney from the Alaska AG office. This particular scenario wasn't brought up but we did talk extensivly about the car jacking end of it. I will say again this is why we have lawyers.

I certainly would like to get a more definitive answer on this scenario. And as I said in other areas I know we are all wanting justice but I my personal thoughts are this was totally out of hand.  just my $0.02 worth