"Wiggins, a 24-year-old graduate of Lee-Davis High School..."
Was this a recent graduation? If not is it such a relevant, interesting, or rare thing that it should be included? Maybe I'm just being too critical. Does Brandon have "real reporter" credentials? Has he graduated from Lee-Davis yet?
Overcharge with murder 1 & take a plea for a lesser charge. Isn't this normal these days? Streamlined Just-us. Next...
So a bullet fired into the air from a vehicle just happens to hit someone in the very same parking lot of the store the shooter just left? Whadda coincidence. Perhaps “fired in the air” is just a CYA way of describing “fired past his ear."
According to the article the defendant is going to be tried for “maliciously (shooting) at an occupied motor vehicle". Merely given the details in the article, I would not vote to convict for murder 1.
This tragic incident is a good argument why you should never fire a warning shot. You have no way to know where that projectile is going to come down (cause what goes up generally comes down). On the other hand, I expect a good deal of wrangling regarding the angle of the projectile when it hit the victim and where, exactly, the victim was when she was hit. If the law requires proof of intent and the projectile came down on the roof or in the window where the victim was sitting at a high angle, then I would not vote to convict the defendant of “maliciously (shooting) at an occupied motor vehicle". "Maliciously" presumes intent. Now if the prosecution includes lesser offenses and the jury was told what they might consist of, then I might vote to convict of a lesser offense. I'd love to watch that trial and hear/read the Judge's instructions to the jury.
nothing like a double standard of justice. the cop in anaheim wasn't even arrested for his 'warning' shot and hasn't yet, nor probably will, be charged.
"Wiggins, a 24-year-old graduate of Lee-Davis High School..."
ReplyDeleteWas this a recent graduation? If not is it such a relevant, interesting, or rare thing that it should be included? Maybe I'm just being too critical. Does Brandon have "real reporter" credentials? Has he graduated from Lee-Davis yet?
Overcharge with murder 1 & take a plea for a lesser charge. Isn't this normal these days? Streamlined Just-us. Next...
So a bullet fired into the air from a vehicle just happens to hit someone in the very same parking lot of the store the shooter just left? Whadda coincidence. Perhaps “fired in the air” is just a CYA way of describing “fired past his ear."
ReplyDeleteAccording to the article the defendant is going to be tried for “maliciously (shooting) at an occupied motor vehicle". Merely given the details in the article, I would not vote to convict for murder 1.
ReplyDeleteThis tragic incident is a good argument why you should never fire a warning shot. You have no way to know where that projectile is going to come down (cause what goes up generally comes down). On the other hand, I expect a good deal of wrangling regarding the angle of the projectile when it hit the victim and where, exactly, the victim was when she was hit. If the law requires proof of intent and the projectile came down on the roof or in the window where the victim was sitting at a high angle, then I would not vote to convict the defendant of “maliciously (shooting) at an occupied motor vehicle". "Maliciously" presumes intent. Now if the prosecution includes lesser offenses and the jury was told what they might consist of, then I might vote to convict of a lesser offense. I'd love to watch that trial and hear/read the Judge's instructions to the jury.
nothing like a double standard of justice. the cop in anaheim wasn't even arrested for his 'warning' shot and hasn't yet, nor probably will, be charged.
ReplyDelete