Career Criminal THUG attacks old disabled person, dies in the process when disabled person defends himself, and it's the old disabled man's fault. In 'fact', it's 'Manslaughter'???... WTF?!? Guess the judge never heard of Self Defense, let alone the new law. Anyway, this is how it appears to me....
- If you're "pinned to the ground" like Mr Lowe was, the Back of the 'pinner' Thug whose beating the hell out of you, is likely the only place you reach with a knife.
- And since it's established that Me Lowe's knife was "small", repeated stabs don't prove 'malice'. It proves that it was a small friggen knife.
- It also proves the first stab wound -- from the "Small Knife" -- had no effect on the thug. Or for that matter the second stab wound either.
- And that left Mr Lowe no recourse from getting beaten to death, except to KEEP STABBING with his "small knife" until the threat from the THUG was over. As in D-E-A-D.
- So where's 'the crime'? All I see is 'maybe' a fine for a concealed knife? And a Ticket for Littering. (/s)
No doubt Mr Lowe made a huge error in having a bench trial, whomever the judge was. You need a jury with a forensic team of your own, with body models of the attack positions, drawings, etc.
But the judge not allowing the Thugs 'Bad Acts' in goes too far. No doubt he thought it would be 'Prejudicial'. But excuse me, that's the whole point of an affirmative defense which it is in Self-Defense Case -- and getting those Bad Acts in and before the jury (or before the court) would be sop .
Mr Lowe *should* win on appeal but big deal. That takes years. Years he doesn't have given his medical condition.
ps: It seems as if Mr Lowe's lawyer wasn't too friggen 'sharp' (no pun).