1) Heroin dealer.Presumably there's reliable evidence to confirm that description...a conviction,for example.
2) An autopsy report that lends credence to a key part of the cop's account of the incident.
3) The judge made clear that he was only allowed,by law,to consider murder in the first degree and not lesser charges.That statement seems to hint that he might have ruled "guilty" on a lesser charge.
But,having worked for a pathologist at a world famous hospital,I've come to respect their skills enormously.So when the report of a trained forensic pathologist tends to confirm the claims made by one of the key players in a criminal case (prosecution or accused) that,IMO,is pretty powerful stuff.
Here’s a link to the judge’s findings. Footnote 9 states that Smith did have an outstanding parole violation warrant and a felony record. The autopsy report does lend credence to the cop’s account of the incident. The State did ask the Court to consider homicide if it did not find for first degree murder.
http://lmgcorporate.com/kmov/documents/STOCKLEY%20VERDICT.pdf
Good points. I’m very tied up with a family matter, so I have not followed this case closely, and can’t now — maybe a FReeper can find “more” on the deceased’s background / record. (That said, I would surely hope the judge has firm proof: It’s hard to believe he would not.)
I’m not going to be able to comment much on FR for a few days - you all carry on (as if I need to say that!)