What would a defendant likely assert if using an affirmative defense?

An affirmative defense is a legal argument that allows a defendant to introduce evidence that, if accepted, would negate or lessen their liability despite the plaintiff's claims. When a defendant asserts that their actions were justified based on the circumstances, it indicates that they acknowledge the actions taken but contend that, under the specific situation they faced, those actions were appropriate or legally permissible.

For example, in cases involving self-defense, a defendant may admit to causing harm but argues that the harm was necessary to protect themselves. This means the defendant is providing a rationale for their conduct, suggesting that it was reasonable and justifiable based on the facts of the situation, hence fulfilling the criteria for an affirmative defense.

Other responses may reflect a variance in asserting different strategies:

• Claiming that the plaintiff has no legal basis for the claim leans more towards a denial rather than a justification, as it does not address the defendant's actions.

• Asserting that the plaintiff is responsible for their own damages indicates a comparative fault or contributory negligence defense instead of asserting that the defendant's own actions were justified.

• Stating that the defendant was unaware of any wrongdoing is a different approach and suggests an absence of intent or knowledge, rather than providing a justification for their actions.

Therefore, the