Quote:
Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!
That's why I think the malfunctioning gun is the important fact here. But also, I'm not sure it's unreasonable to point a gun at anyone during a highly stressful threatening situation. I wouldn't expect anyone to make perfect choices during that sort of scenario. A trained military expert maybe but an unsuspecting farmer, no. And I think that after pulling the trigger several times it's reasonable to assume the gun isn't loaded.
Of course you have to believe Stanley's testimony. And this is where I'm unclear. It seems obvious that the prosecution's testimony was unbelievable. But does that automatically make the defense testimony valid? Do you have to believe one or the other?
I think what makes sense is a careless storage of a firearm charge.
|
There are many cases where this type of careless handling of a firearm result in manslaughter convictions. In R. v. Penner (2017 BCSC 1688), accused handles a firearm that he believes is unloaded in confined space and in close proximity to three other persons. It accidentally discharges and tragically kills someone. He was convicted of manslaughter.
I can provide many other similar examples.
EDIT: I will try to find a more analogous example later tonight because I do think the reasonableness of Mr. Stanley’s belief the gun was unloaded is an interesting question. My difficulty is that he is the one who loaded it just moments earlier (as I understand it).