[Hajman]

Only a lunatic or a blind zealot would consider that a defense.

Yup, incapable of rational thought and dealing with the evidence that points to his innocence. I gave you the actual law in both tort and criminal law, in Maryland law and other, and you simply ignore them, attacking them emotionally instead. And you come up with this statute, giving no reference to it, and calling it the actual statute. Oh well, been nice talking with you.

-The Hajman-

[Roscoe]

the evidence that points to his innocence.

Which is?

[Poohbah]

Well, Zito may offer that defense, but a jury of his peers is extremely likely to throw it out--even if Zito was unquestionably correct on the Fourth Amendment issue (which, IMNHO, he isn't--at least, not to a level of absolute certainty).

Most folks do NOT view blasting away as soon as the door opens to be a reasonable application of deadly force under any circumstances. With the evidence at hand, I would certainly vote convict on manslaughter charges, and would probably convict on capital murder charges unless a LOT of extenuating circumstances are present that I do not see.