To: Hajman
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.
292 posted on
04/08/2002 11:59:35 AM PDT by
Poohbah
To: 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).
I might agree with the first, however why don't you think the police did something illegal in this siutation? In other words, why do you think they had athority to do what they did? And what was the probable cause for that athority?
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.
Possibly, however they did break down a door trying to get in before they opened the second. On a personal note, assuming I didn't know who they were (it's hard to say what I'd do if they claimed to be police), I wouldn't hesitate to protect myself (and others). And I personally know a good number of other people that would feel the same way. But that's just on a personal note.
-The Hajman-
293 posted on
04/08/2002 12:04:16 PM PDT by
Hajman
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson