Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa_Complex
It's also based on the actions of a reasonable person. A reasonable person, even one who has his adrenaline pumping because of a near miss, knows that it is wrong to repeatedly shoot someone who is already bleeding out on the floor with a bullet in his head.
|
Hey we weren't there, so we don't know for sure. Maybe the pharmacist saw the guy move or twitch. It's hard to prove that this guy was not fearful of his life. If I saw a guy that I just shot move, I'd shoot him again because you do't know what they are going to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by askmrjesus
It would seem obvious that the District Attorney who charged the pharmacist with Murder, probably has a better understanding of the law than you do.
There are limits to everything, and this guy exceeded those limits.
JC
|
Well i do know that it's hard to prove a negative. You have to convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt that this guy was not fearful of his life. How do you prove that? You can't.