He is not even arguing that he perceived a threat.
He is arguing that he had an accident.
He could be charged with wrongful discharge of a weapon
you don’t know WHAT he’s arguing. We haven’t heard anything from him. I think it’s stunning that so many people on FR would not wait for facts before deciding what really happened.
Just like the GZ case; many on here had to eat crow because they took the media’s word for crap and it was BS.
Did the guy shoot through a closed door? Do we have ANY other facts or even information confirmed and stipulated to? Right, we don’t....
He is arguing that he had an accident.
Good point. Technically, I think he's saying both, sort of - he's saying that he perceived a threat, and that's why he pointed the gun at her, but that he did not intend to shoot. But, the fact that he's even arguing that it was accidental tends to undermine the seriousness of the threat. "I didn't MEAN to shoot her, but even if I did it would have been justified because I thought I was in imminent danger" is not a terribly compelling story.