(08-17-2018, 02:08 PM)Kane Wrote:

(08-17-2018, 12:15 PM)Jagwired Wrote: I'm just saying. Had the man not physically assaulted the dude he would not have been killed that day. Plain and simple. He had zero right to assault the man. Call it a shove , a push or whatever you want. In the eyes of the law it is assault/battery. He was not in the act of defending his woman because she did not require defense at that moment as she was not under physical attack. I suspect the guy will walk on the charge.

I agree he had zero right to assault the guy.
Drejka didn't have any right to confront them about the spot. Though he could have called the police dept and reported the license plate...
But judging from his past encounters he isn't a civil person.
Also.. could have held the man at gunpoint.
Also could have shot the man to injure instead of kill shot.

There is no way to say one person was more justified in their egregious action, however, one persons action was deadly.
The end result matters.

We basically agree. I have no problem with the state bringing a charge. If there is a shred of evidence that proves this man made a habit of looking for/instigating situations hoping for the result he got then appropriate punishment will be handed down. I just kinda doubt that the state will be able to disprove that in the 1.5 to 2 seconds that elapsed from the assault and the subsequent shot that the shooter had time to realize he was not in eminent danger of more physical attacks and shot the man any way. Sucks his kids had to see it.

---