From the same perspective, aren't the prior reports/complaints about Drejka threatening to shoot people also inadmissible? From what I've read, none of those alleged incidents even resulted in an arrest, let alone a trial and a conviction.Bartholomew Roberts said:From a legal perspective, McGlockton’s past criminal history is irrelevant unless you can show the shooter was aware of it.
From the same perspective, aren't the prior reports/complaints about Drejka threatening to shoot people also inadmissible? From what I've read, none of those alleged incidents even resulted in an arrest, let alone a trial and a conviction.
AB said:From the same perspective, aren't the prior reports/complaints about Drejka threatening to shoot people also inadmissible?
BR said:Generally yes... say however that the defense chose to have Drejka’s neighbor testify about how Drejka taught Sunday School and was a wonderful neighbor. They then argue such a gentle man could not possibly have the anger to shoot a man unless in dire need. They’ve now opened the door for the prosecution to introduce other evidence about Drejka’s character. Naturally, that’s a trickier problem for the defense than the prosecution.
What lesser charge? He's only charged with manslaughter, not murder like Zimmerman.briandg said:Do you think that he should just plead alford? to a lesser charge? I'm not certain that fighting it out in court would get him anywhere.
That's what I mean when I say a good lawyer may be able to keep him out of prison. I think that's also what B.R. means when he says the case is winnable.Just playing devil's advocate here, but if I had just been knocked down, maybe wacked my head, my vision might not be as perfect as usual for a second or two maybe a little blurry, and I might "see" the guy who just assaulted me "looming" over me, or moving toward me (and therefore a threat) when a view from a camera at a different angle shows something else. We're talking about a very short period of time, what the shooter perceived as reality, and what reality actually was.
44 AMP said:Another point, and one which could change all our speculation is what was said before and during the attack. We don't know what that was, and without knowing, about anything is possible. Suppose the woman had been telling him that "her boyfriend will kill you when he gets here", or something like that. Then the guy gets blindsided. Might that create a perception of a real, serious, and imminent threat?
It might not be your choice to do anything about it, but what you describe here is still illegal. That said, if that were indeed the circumstance, the driver could explain to the person taking her to task for breaking the law by illegally parking in a space reserved for the handicapped without the required sticker or placard. There are numerous excuses anyone can put forth to try to minimize or justify Brittany's decision to park illegally but, in the end, she parked illegally. When called out for it, she could have just apologized and moved her car.WyMark said:Hypothetical: What if the victim had a handicap tag on his car, but was riding with the girlfriend this time? There's no way to know that, and it's really none of anyone else's business. If it was a one-time thing due to the circumstances then let it go.
Not to downplay the seriousness of being arrested for manslaughter, but what lesser charge could he plead to that would keep the wolves at bay?
someone is standing over you
You suggested that Drejka plead guilty to a lesser charge under the Alford doctrine (which means he doesn't admit to having committed the crime, but he acknowledges that the state would likely prevail at trial). What I'm saying is that the decedent's family and friends probably think Drejka should be convicted of murder, and there's probably a segment of the community at large who agree. But, unlike Zimmerman, Drejka isn't charged with murder, he's charged with manslaughter. I don't know what the next couple of levels below that might be in Florida -- I would guess that if they have a charge like Negligent Homicide it would be about the same level, so what's lower? Negligent discharge of a firearm?briandg said:I have no idea what you are trying to say. Are you saying that the prosecutor should choose what a citizen is charged with and tried for based on public opinion? Are you saying that there should be no plea deals because the citizens won't like it?Not to downplay the seriousness of being arrested for manslaughter, but what lesser charge could he plead to that would keep the wolves at bay?