Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
He says he did. And frankly, if you're going to make up a story, wouldn't "the weapon discharged unintentionally" sound better than "I was trying to shoot the handicapped man playing with the toy truck, but I'm a horrible shot with this deadly weapon I intentionally discharged in a public area"?.
|
But now the officer can take the stand, say that he heard on radio that the autistic man had loaded his firearm (apparently some other idiot officer reported that) and say he saw what he believed to be a firearm in the man's hand. A man who was not complying with police orders. It gives him a defense. If the autistic man made any sudden move, or even was perceived to have, than the officer can try to justify why he was 'forced' to immediately act. And they can still talk about a perceived threat as to why they handcuffed Mr. Kinsey. It wouldn't be the first time that an officer was 'justified' in using lethal force because of a perceived threat, and wouldn't be the first time a bystander was caught in the crosshairs.
Unintentionally discharging a rifle multiple times and handcuffing Mr. Kinsey after said accident would probably be harder to defend. It at least shows gross negligence.