Posted by heeler: Sometimes when I read reports similiar to this and take in the view points of some of the posters it makes me truely worried about ever appearing before a jury of my "peers".
The phrase "jury of 'peers' " is oft repeated, but what the constitution actually provides for is a speedy trial by an
impartial jury.
We have all seen or heard of trial outcomes that seem entirely unfair.
With a fair and balanced jury, a trial outcome would depend upon the facts presented and upon the law; the judge serves as the gate-keeper for admitting evidence, and he or she also gives instructions to the jury. The latter can permit a jury to consider whether a shooting involved lawful self defense, or conversely, prevent the jury from doing so; that will depend upon the evidence presented by the accused.
Laws vary among jurisdictions, but the one common denominator is that deadly force may be used
when immediately necessary to
prevent certain serious crimes, and it may
not be used to
punish someone for a crime that has already been committed, or because the criminals may commit another crime at a later time.
One cannot judge an incident based on anecdotal descriptions of what happened. From the original description of the case at hand, one
might infer that the shooter may have fired at escaping felons without justification, but no one here has heard either a detailed description of exactly what happened or the shooter's account of why he did so.
Nor do we want to hear it. The fact that no charges have been filed does
not mean that the shooter is free from the risk of prosecution. Only a trial and acquittal, a pardon, the expiration of any applicable statute of limitations, or death can eliminate that risk.
That's why we must all realize that the need to limit one's statements (after telling arriving officers that one is the victim and will press charges, and pointing out evidence and witnesses) to those made with legal counsel does not stop when it appears that no charges will be filed.
And yes, if one ever does happen to find himself or herself in the position of being tried by a jury, one should be very worried indeed. Even if the jury is fair minded and the facts seem very favorable, one's fate is out of his or her hands, and enough evidence has been accumulated to convince at least the state that the defendant committed a crime.