1) Vilified by the local press for defending himself
2) Criticized by the cops for not waiting for them to arrive and handle the situation
3) Thrown in jail for "excessive use of force"
4) Successfully sued by the criminals for causing them "pain & suffering."
Don't forget the interviews with the perps, who are the "real victims" of this heinous event.
Don't be so pessimistic, Kelli properly identified who was the victim and who was the perp. I'm impressed with the writer and the editor. I know, it's a low standard, but considering how poorly they usually do...
If he thinks that there are two armed felons running around the streets, he has a moral responsibility to call it in.
4) Successfully sued by the criminals for causing them "pain & suffering."
When they show up in court, they'll have Hearts and Flowers playing in the background and a cheering section of their maggot friends in the peanut gallery.
Dead men tell no tales.
Not in Ohio. Or at least not in all parts of Ohio. Now, if he were in Great Britain or NY or the People's Republik of Massachusetts......
Funny thing is, I am so used to the left wing spin on these stories that I naturally assumed that the "victim" was the perp who was shot. The MSM rarely seems to refer to the person defending themselves as a victim.
At least he was called a victim, consistently too. Now if they'd just have called his assailants that, rather than "gunmen". Sounds like the defender is a real gunman.