Quote:
Originally Posted by CaramonLS
Well of course not, because he claims it is a hangfire.
However, self defense runs through this case entirely right up until the final discharge of the gun. He said that he feared for his life and that of his family, thought that these guys may have ran over his wife because she was out mowing the lawn and they ran their car over the mower. He states that pretty clearly.
That is why the situation escalated, that is why he brought out the gun and that is why he fired 2 warning shots into the ground and tried to fire a 3rd. The jury chose to believe that Stanley's actions were reasonable given the situation.
|
No one is arguing about the self defense though up until the point where the shot was fired. You called it a dog and pony show because of self defense, but that's all peripheral which set the stage, so to speak, but no one argued that what he did up until the incidental firing of the gun was unreasonable in the court. Which means it wasn't a self defense case and certainly did not underscore the need to have self defense law reform.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CaramonLS
This trial underscores the need to self defense law reform in Canada. There shouldn't be a dog and pony show every time someone defends themselves on their own property in Canada.
|