That's how they "lost" this case. My question: was it intentional?
Did he point the gun at someone? Pointing a loaded weapon at someone involves some intent. An alien invader who has a criminal history surely knows how to use a gun.
On the other hand, this defense opens a lot of doors when legally carrying citizens shoot someone.
First of all the prosecution never claimed it was wilful, deliberate and premeditated which is the definition of first degree murder. They claimed it was second degree murder because the act of firing a gun on a crowded pier is an act inherently dangerous to life evincing an “abandoned and malignant heart”, ie second degree malice for murder.
Their murder theory was exactly right. They also allowed a manslaughter charge which is a lesser charge than murder. Both theories were correct. There is no evidence of a desire to let this defendant off. The defense argued that the gun went off accidentally not on purpose. That is the fact that jury bought.
Manslaughter doesn’t require intent th defendant was charged with both...
Jury let this guy “walk”. He was charged with murder and manslaughter to be acquitted of both is inexcusable... may karma visit the jurors and their families often...