Even the District Attorney in Newton County, Massachusetts says Scott Hayes was attacked and tackled to the ground before he pulled a gun and shot his assailant. So why is Hayes in court today facing charges of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and violation of a constitutional right causing injury?

Here's how Newton County District Attorney Marian Ryan describes what led up to the shooting on Thursday night:

Speaking at Newton Police Headquarters, Ryan said a group of pro-Israel protesters had gathered in the area when they became involved in a confrontation with a man on the other side of the street. 

Ryan said the man on the other side of the street stepped into the road multiple times. After both sides continued to exchange words, Ryan said the man “came very rapidly across the street” and tackled Hayes, who was part of the pro-Israel group. A scuffle ensued and Ryan said Hayes shot the man. 

Ryan said Hayes legally possessed the gun he used in this incident. 

The man who was shot suffered life-threatening injuries, according to Ryan, and was being treated for his injuries at a local hospital as of around 10:15 p.m. 

In order for Ryan to convict Hayes, she has to prove one of these three things beyond a reasonable doubt: Hayes did not reasonably and actually believe that he was in immediate danger of great bodily harm or death; or Hayes did not do everything reasonable in the circumstances to avoid physical combat before resorting to force; or Hayes used more force to defend himself than was reasonably necessary in the circumstances.

Hayes was tackled by the man, who ran across the street to assault him. Just falling to the ground could have ended his life, depending on how his neck and head hit the pavement. At that point, I'd say Hayes had a reasonable fear that he was in immediate danger of great bodily harm or death. And given that he was tackled by his assailant, he was hardly able to avoid physical combat before resorting to force. 

So did Hayes use more force than was necessary to protect himself? I don't think so, and it sounds like many of the folks who were present when Hayes was attacked feel the same way. 

“I do not think he should have been arrested and I think every minute that he’s in handcuffs or otherwise in custody is an injustice,” said David Sherman, who witnessed the shooting. 

“All of a sudden, he was running at Scott, fists up in the air ready to fight and tackled him,” Sherman said, describing the moment the other man in this incident ran across Washington Street. 

Sherman said he and several other people worked to pull the man off Hayes. 

“It was after we managed to get the guy off of Scott that we saw there was a wound and started treating it,” he said. 

Sources said the injured man was shot in the stomach. 

Supporters of Hayes said the shooting was an instance of self defense. 

“Even if you disagree with us, you don’t have the right to hurt us,” said one of Hayes’ friends, Aia Polansky. 

Based on her own recounting of the incident, Ryan is adding insult to the injuries Hayes received if she doesn't drop the charges he's currently facing. Hayes was violently assaulted while exercising his right to protest, and defended himself with his lawfully carried firearm. Unless there's some compelling evidence to the contrary that the D.A. is unaware of or isn't sharing with the public, it sounds to me like the only person who should be facing charges is recovering in a hospital.