Spats McGee
Administrator
It's important to understand that at this juncture, the facts as you have read them are the facts, for all legal purposes. At the trial level, the court or the jury "finds the facts," and decides what the facts were. The appellate court can review those facts, but no new evidence may be introduced. The defendant can make a motion for a new trial, for example, if new evidence has been uncovered, but that would go back to the trial court. Appellate courts look at the record on appeal. They do not allow new evidence to be introduced at the trial court level.. . . .But we are reading a judgement and one in this case where the "findings of fact" are laid out as exactly that. There is no question if the facts are accurate only if the findings of fact are without judicial error. It makes things sometimes seem more clear than they may be. . . . .
If I ever needed more proof that CC badges are a bad idea, this case would have provided it. In this case, the decedent was already calm, and nobody was in any imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. Not only did the appellant flash the badge, then approached him with the intent to remove him from the church. That's not defense of self or others. That's an arrest, and I know of no jurisdiction in which a CCL gives one arrest powers.
A tragic story all the way around, but I will admit that given the appellant's history and the facts as recited by the appellate court, the sentence is not all that surprising.