Forgive the lack of link but it won't be hard to find. A police officer was killed in South Carolina today, and six others were wounded. The suspect was negotiated down and arrested, alive and uninjured. You'll never guess what race the shooter was. Tamir Rice was unavailable for comment, since he got shot dead a few years ago. edit to add link. If it wasn't clear, the shooter was white, in a wealthy area, and he shot seven cops, one fatally. But Philando Castile was sooo dangerous that he needed to be shot immediately, while this guy, who killed a cop, got taken alive. Cops can take dangerous folks alive when they want.
He's not really a murderer- just a man who grew tired of statist intrusion. They need these guys to propagate the species and keep White humanity alive...
I'm not an expert on the various degrees of homicide...but is there any hint that she meant to kill the guy, like cuz she didn't like him playing his stereo so loud or he didn't recycle or she was jealous? I mean, it's a heinous error she made, but it WAS a mistake, wasn't it? What am I missing?
There certainly seem to be reasons to wonder if she could possibly have mistaken one apartment for the other. If she knew she wasn't at her own place, then one sort of has to assume that she did what she went there to do, doesn't one?
Dude in Chicago was found guilty of second degree murder and other lesser count. Not guilty on first degree murder. This is the cop that shot the kid holding a knife and then the CPD tried to cover it up.
An understanding that this demo of Whites is as capable of cold-blooded murder as the male version. Why do you assume it's a heinous error, and in the same sentence reassure try to yourself that it was a mistake? It's kind of cut and dried, yes.
That would be a detective's job-- love affair gone bad, gambling debts, competition for a bisexual lover, exposure as a crooked cop, "he killed my brother back in our Houston childhood"--there are as many theories-at-a-distance as there are movie plots. Presumably there are less as one looks into the realities of the principles' lives. Harry Bosch would figure it out...
So...there's no theory or evidence that she set out to kill him. There's nothing to contradict her story that she went into the apartment in the same place in the layout, but on a different floor, from her apartment, and thought he was an intruder. Got it. Is that the word on the street, Huggy Bear?
There are said to be rather obvious differences in their doorways, though-- a completely different colored doormat and something else, I forget what. And then there's the matter of getting in without a key-- if you expect to need your key and find the door open you might think there's an intruder; yes-- but then again you might also be more likely to notice that the doormat is wrong? I haven't actually seen those doorways;, but if it is as said, one can imagine a neutral investigator feeling a need for explanation of some stronger nature than "I thought he was an intruder in my place."
You asked the question, Clouseau, and were given an answer. If you need a White person to validate it for you, please state that in your future requests and I won't bother. If you believe a thoroughbred cop's story up front after said cop has killed a POC, you needn't ask in the first place.
I believe this is incorrect, but US law may differ to my understanding of the common law. The office intentionally shot the victim dead so an intentional homicide. The defence to the shooting is self defence. However self defence cannot lie as there was in fact no imminent threat to the officer. Just a man in his own living room However a "mistake" as to that fact can nevertheless provide a defence to murder. This is called putative self defence at common law. So if the mistake was genuine - it is not murder. That is not the end of the matter. If the mistake was genuine, but not objectively reasonable, then it is manslaughter. So the correct charge is murder - otherwise the DA is assuming that the Officer's belief was genuine.
Jitty...so you’re saying the “wrong apartment” defense is an affirmative defense, and using a lesser charge makes the defendant’s case for her? Is that it?
Yes. The charging assumes that a genuine mistake was made and effectively sabotages the prosecution from the outset. This mechanics are virtually identical to pistorius.
The key, the doormat and also the place has assigned parking. So hard to see how the cop could park on the wrong floor. It seems noise complaints has been made including that day