LogFAQs > #910523333

I like that his own video surveillance was brought in as evidence.

While a lot of this shit is the wife's fault for waking up and freaking out her husband, you can clearly see that he shot the kid in the back when he was almost halfway off the property. That's some cold-blooded shit. Even if they caught him inside the property first, that'd be extremely hard to justify. At any rate, I would like to see the wife tried as an accessory.

And even if it was just a warning shot and his story wasn't just a blatant cover (once again, thank you, camera), he'd still warrant at least a manslaughter charge for being so stupidly reckless.

mrduckbear posted...

Dana was them embraced by her husband as he was seen wiping away his tears and insists he only shot at him as a warning shot but his foot slipped on the pavement yet he fired straight into his direction rather than up in the air.

Which is a flaky story considering you don't need to fire a warning shot when somebody is already

LinkPizza posted...

I don't think his foot slipped. Also, when I think of someone's foot slipping and causing them to shot in the wrong direction, I feel it would usually be a slip where they aim up.

Well, technically he was aiming up already then the rifle could instead come down if he had slipped, but you don't really see any slipping and there's no point in firing a warning shot when somebody is already running. Granted, I know people do shit like that in movies but... still.
---

(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.