carebear
Member
Not being sympathetic about an armed robber getting shot is not necessarily the same thing as feeling that the cop was justified in doing the shooting.
There's no necessary (formal logic term) contradiction in thinking both "cop screwed up" and "still not sorry for the bad guy".
He got him in the liver with a .308? Yeah, that robber will be getting a trauma center punch card by the time he's through.
On a legal note, they're charging the trooper with aggravated assault. By insisting he actually intended to shoot due to a perceived threatening movement the trooper is giving the jury an out to acquit him; if they choose to accept his perception as reasonable.
Apparently the tape won't help him, but if he gets a friendly jury (the guy was elected mayor, he must have some friends in the area) with no sympathy for armed robbers? He might have a shot.
There's no necessary (formal logic term) contradiction in thinking both "cop screwed up" and "still not sorry for the bad guy".
He got him in the liver with a .308? Yeah, that robber will be getting a trauma center punch card by the time he's through.
On a legal note, they're charging the trooper with aggravated assault. By insisting he actually intended to shoot due to a perceived threatening movement the trooper is giving the jury an out to acquit him; if they choose to accept his perception as reasonable.
Apparently the tape won't help him, but if he gets a friendly jury (the guy was elected mayor, he must have some friends in the area) with no sympathy for armed robbers? He might have a shot.