Unarmed Man Charged in NY Shooting

[Frank Ettin]

Does anyone know what the actual law under which he was charged says? ...

I'm just not seeing the felonious intent here...

Remember, we're at an early stage here. The indictment is just the beginning. I would expect the indictment to be subjected by the defense to various pre-trial challenges. The first would probably what is generally called a motion to dismiss. That basically asks a judge to agree that as a matter of law the facts as alleged by the prosecution, viewed most favorably to the prosecution, do not constitute a crime.

There are several more acts to this drama that will need to play out before we can begin to understand the whole story.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

I'm just not seeing the felonious intent here...

The intent is open to interpretation and the actions are the cause for the charges. From what I have learned (don't know much) charges generally start with the highest degree and as stated by Frank

Remember, we're at an early stage here.

and how the next likely move by the defense would be:

I would expect the indictment to be subjected by the defense to various pre-trial challenges. The first would probably what is generally called a motion to dismiss. That basically asks a judge to agree that as a matter of law the facts as alleged by the prosecution, viewed most favorably to the prosecution, do not constitute a crime.

and likely to end up with a lesser charge would be my guess.

A guess is all we can do until (as already pointed out) the details of the case (evidence such as witnesses, Psychology report, video, etc.) are gone through by both sides. From there an offer may go back and forth as to final charges and maybe sentence limits between the prosecution and defense in the attempt to make a deal.

Then again one side or the other may decide to make no offer and choose have it heard in court believing they have a better chance or no choice but to do so and play the hand dealt them.

 

[zxcvbob]

The grand jury should have indicted the prosecutor for something (perjury? civil rights violation?) for even bringing that charge. Yes that is within their power, it's just *highly* unusual.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

The grand jury should have indicted the prosecutor for something (perjury? civil rights violation?) for even bringing that charge.

What information lead you to that conclusion? It is within the norm to charge someone who causes death or harm through their actions (especially when those actions are illegal) with Homicide or felonious assault.

Yes that is within their power, it's just *highly* unusual.

Not at all. Often charges are of the highest degree and from there are adjusted to fit the evidence or lack thereof.

Often in cases of homicide a person may be charged with first degree murder with little to no evidence that the offender planned the crime but it doesn't mean the final charges end up that way. In fact with many cases of homicide, premeditation is hard to prove to a degree that warrants a first degree murder charge. It is part of the game.

Even someone who stole a car and ran from police may initially have as many as 3-4 additional charges tacked on such as reckless driving, speeding, running a stop sign and failure to yield. Not to mention resisting arrest, fleeing and eluding, driving under suspension. It all depends on the details and even then many of the charges will be dropped. It is part of the game.