Quote:
Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll
The thing about the hang fire is that while they are rare, they do occur. Using 60-70 year to of surplus ammo would certainly increase the chance of one depending on how the ammo had been stored and how degraded it was at the time it was fired. The RCMP expert called even testified that when he test fired the pistol he experienced a failure to fire and a jam, using Stanley’s ammo, both of these would support the theory of degraded ammo.
He had also not personally experienced a hang fire and offered his opinion that one might last a half second at most, as well as referencing a study done that claims a .28 second delay for a hang fire.
I’d say that the firearms testimony didn’t do much for the Crown and only served to confirm that it was possible that the pistol experienced a malfunction that night
|
There is videos on youtube of hang fires lasting longer then 7 seconds. One guy blows a hole in his hat even (idiot)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Makarov
Well, yes, I suppose those facts could be relevant to the issue of intent and therefore to the issue of whether Mr. Stanley should be guilty of murder or manslaughter. But I don’t think they are relevant to the issue of whether Mr. Stanley should have been acquitted of all charges. Firing a gun, even as a warning shot, at people who are not causing you to reasonably fear for your own safety (ie in self defence) is an unlawful act and in this case that unlawful act cases the death of another person. Therefore Mr. Stanley should have been guilty of at least manslaughter (if this had been his story). However, as I understand it, his story was that he had the rifle for the purpose of firing warning shots (presumably safely aimed away from any persons) but the rifle accidentally went off at the precise moment when it was pointed at the victim (or the vehicle he was in). So that was the issue for the jury: is that evidence sufficient to rise a reasonable doubt in your mind?
Two caveats: I don’t practice criminal law so MBates may well chime in to correct me on my feeble understanding of murder and manslaughter; and I don’t know with any precision what the evidence at trial was but this is what I have gleaned so far (I definitely could Ben wrong).
|
They said in the trial that he was well within his legal rights grabbing the gun and firing warning shots, it was the 5-10 seconds after that they were discussing.