When determining the primary aggressor you should...

• A. Compare physical evidence to statements
• B. Rely only on statements
• C. Rely only on physical evidence
• D. Ignore statements and evidence

Answer: (A)

Determining the primary aggressor relies on weighing both physical evidence and statements to corroborate what happened. The best approach is to compare what you observed at the scene—injuries, property damage, weapons, signs of control or coercion—with what the individuals say occurred. This helps you identify who used or threatened violence and how the dynamic of power and control played out, which is essential in separating self-defense from aggression. By cross-checking statements against physical indicators, you also improve your assessment of credibility and context, such as whether injuries or threats align with the claimed timeline or history between the parties. Relying only on statements risks accepting a biased, incomplete, or coerced account, while relying only on physical evidence can miss context, patterns of coercive behavior, and self-defense considerations. Ignoring both would leave the determination unfounded.