News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Just manslaughter eh?
It’s easier to get a warrant for his arrest from a grand jury for manslaughter because it doesn’t require motive, just a dead person. They can always upgrade that too murder if the investigation turns up something.
If you point a firearm at someones head and firearms are one of your professional responsibilities, there are absolutely elevating criterion for higher charges. There is no reasonable doubt he was unaware of the ~~possible~~ probable consequences of pulling a trigger while aiming a firearm at someone.
As prosecuting attorney I would have the investigator simply ask 'WTF were you thinking?' and use whatever his response was (even a 5a plead) as prima facie evidence of guilt for a pre-meditated offence.
All guns are loaded, always. It’s never taught any different.
Even if you’ve pulled the trigger and nothing happened, it’s still loaded.
Throw the book at the chump.
This would get you reprimanded in court at best disbarred at worst. Utilizing the right to remain silent can not be used against you in a court of law. If it could it'd defeat the entire purpose of it by making silence become an admittance of guilt.
Worth it :p
You're right, but I was being rhetorical. The video would really not be needed. Expert testimony on proper firearm handling, records of his training contrasted against his actual statements, and the collected evidence would be sufficient. My bet is he'll take a plea if offered.
That seems like good evidence for a manslaughter charge.. It doesn't address motive at all, though, so wouldn't be enough to upgrade the charge.
Motive isn't required for murder charges. Premeditation is.
Premeditation isn't required for murder charges.
Malice aforethought is.
Eh, premeditation is required everywhere, 'malice aforethought' (might want to check the definition of it because even it has premeditation baked into the definition) is an additional component for some states and federal law.
If premeditation was a requirement, 2nd degree murder would not exist.
We're talking about a firearm crime though. Firearms safety training the first thing they tell you is the gun is always loaded so never point it at something unless you intend to kill it. This is my point. If he pointed it at her, he intended to kill her by definition according to his training. His stating it was a 'dry fire' means he says it wasn't a crime of passion, and so he's going for 'it was an accident' defence which as a trained officer he should not have access too.
They have a 1st degree case that will be plead down to 2nd degree/reckless indifference or maybe manslaughter depending on how corrupt the PA is.
What would you have him charged with? So far the facts point to this being done without malice
No, "suspicion" of manslaughter. So, of course, the police literally get away with murder. Again...
He hasn't gotten away with it yet.