Quote (Goomshill @ May 29 2020 10:09pm)
They don't even know the cause of death of George Floyd. You don't need the accused to prove another potential cause of death, if you can't even get a medical examiners report saying he caused it at all.
In the hobo situation, they'd only file charges after a medical examiner looked at the hobo and determined whether it was a homicide or not, what gun wounds he suffered, and thus know whether he was already dead prior to the shooting.
Which is why murder charges come after medical examiner reports. Not before them.
If the prosecution went in front of a jury and said "Well we aren't even sure he was shot, we haven't actually examined the body and don't know how he died", the guy would walk.
Not an apt analogy since in this case we have the guy on video doing the thing that we all know causes death, to a person we know ten minutes earlier was healthy enough to walk and talk on his own with no outward signs of injury or illness.
Quote (thesnipa @ May 29 2020 10:16pm)
no, he's right. a lack of mens rea is the direct reason over charges end in acquittals. see Freddie grey or many other cases.
why people as a society cant accept 10-20 years for old men that come out as social pariahs, lose their jobs forever, and in many cases get divorced and/or alienated from children to avoid connection to killer cops is beyond me. sure a part in me wants them to fry, but a bird in the hand beats two in the bush.
Depends on the standard. In some states it's enough to know that your actions could result in death even if you don't have the intention of killing.
This post was edited by Thor123422 on May 29 2020 09:17pm