That would actually be useful although it would only be part of the story. There is a lot of stuff not allowed in at trial on both sides.
And there are bits that are taken out of the record.
If you find a transcript though I would like to read it. I am now curious.
So am I. For all of the fighting in this thread- I think it boils down to one thing:
Did Maye know that the people breaking into the room were cops? If he did not- then there is room for a Manslaughter charge at the most. Certainly not death row.
Based on the account and the information I've seen at this point- there is room for doubt. But there may be a lot more to this story -I suspect- than we're getting at this point.
"I'd love to read a transcript of the trial"
I suspect a troll,hehe.
Normally Freepers are very fact oriented and are diligent truth seekers. (What make Free Republic great) Unfortunately when it come to issuing an opinion concerning someone using a gun or police overreaction, a number of Freepers are telepathic, they can tell you exactly what happened from simply reading a headline and two sentences.
[Template, homeowner shoots X, homeowner innocent
Law enforcement official shoots X, lawman guilty
(Exception armed suspect in the commission of felony) (Exception to exception ATSF agents are always guilty)]
I have absolutely no idea what really happened. It is possible that the man is innocent and this is a case of small town justice with racial overtones. It is also possible that if presented with all the evidence, we would all agree with the jury. Without more information I am mystified how people can have such strong opinions as to guilt or innocence.
And while,
I am strong supporter of people’s right to own guns and protect themselves with them. I have little or no sympathy for the criminal element. I have no problem with store owners shooting robbers. I do think the idea of shooting at "intruders", should necessarily be one’s default reaction.
Despite all the anecdotal information people love to sight, I think it is incredibly rare that an armed homeowner confronts an intruder and is subsequently killed, because they hesitated to long trying to identify the intruder. I think incidents in which someone fired a gun without identifying, their target and killed an innocent person are far far more common (by a ratio well over a 100 to 1).
I think we are dealing with the same fallacy as people who have this fear their children will be abducted by a stranger, but let their kids ride their bikes around the neighborhood after dark. Even though statistically you can prove that their kids are 1000 times more likely to be hit and killed on their bikes, they still see the bike as benign and strangers abductions as the real threat.