ANSWERS: 6
  • If he was acting in self defense, or the defense of others, then he would be not guilty. We only punish people criminally for acts that are intentional, or so highly reckless that they should have known that they would have caused harm. A killing that occurs while legally defending yourself does not fit this category.
  • That is just awful that that happened to the little girl. I do not think he should be able to claim self defense over this. I agree he should be charged with reckless homicide. He WAS trying to shoot the girl's father. He had to know the consequences were not going to be good firing a gun at someone.
  • Sadly, this is often what the 'justice' (hah!) system boils down to... trying to do whatever possible to get off, even if it involves exploiting legal loop holes. Though to be fair, I can't propose a better system.
  • I don't see anywhere in the story that the dad made the first move-so how could it be self-defense? Now, if it comes out that the dad made a physical threat against the defendant and he was responding to that-might be a plea. But doesn't appear the dad has been charged with anything. Don't think the story tells enough. Seems like there should be some major charge in any event because the 8 year old is dead.
  • Not enough facts in that blurb to say. One of the biggest problems with such cases is that the court of public opinion will often hand down a death sentence before the trial even starts. Ordinary people have little knowledge of the law and no concern about facts. All they know is that a child got killed and someone needs to pay for that tragedy. You yourself prove this by mis-stating her age. What other "facts" about this case are either wrong or just unknown?
  • we witha good lawyer he might not face murder 2 he might get off on manslaughter and do a few years.

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy