Jury acquits delivery driver of main charge in shooting of YouTube prankster - eviltoast

A jury has found a delivery driver not guilty in the shooting of a YouTube prankster who was following him around a mall food court earlier this year

  • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re changing the hypothetical and added mere possibilities. Anything is possible. That’s why self defense is considered an imperfect legal remedy, and it’s one reason why it is said “the law abhors self help.”

    When the qualified privilege to use reasonable force in defense of yourself or others proves insufficient, the perfect remedy is in a civil action for wrongful death.

    What matters in evaluating the use of force, the privilege only exists where these hypotheticals are reasonably probable.

    What fact would you hang your hat on here, to tell the judge and jury that you probably had absolutely no choice but to try and kill, especially when, as here, you are proved to have been mistakes, and were not in physical danger and the putative aggressor was unarmed?

    • Candelestine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      That an assumption that any putative aggressor actually is unarmed is flawed. That is not determinable in a short span of time, and an inappropriate assumption for a person to make.

      And yes, there will probably be a civil suit.

      • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s flawed because it’s possible it’s wrong.

        You don’t get to kill based on mere possibility. And you would not like living in a world where you could.

        The patron had plenty of room to retreat. Plenty of time to give a better warning, such as “stop or I’ll fucking kill you.” If a person keeps coming after that sort of warning, that’s a fact from which the inference a threat to life is more reasonable; a person with no fear of death.

        This dude had a phone in his hands. Didn’t take a swing at the guy. Didn’t persist with no apparent fear of death. The patron pulled out the gun and fired instantly after merely saying “stop” three times.

        I accept the jury was in the best position to decide the facts and apply the law. The dude was charged, stood trial, and was only partially aquitted. I rest my case.