Dragosan wrote:
http://www.sptimes.com/2006/08/03/Hillsborough/_Excusable_homicide__.shtml
Sorry if this link isn't perfect, I lose at the internet sometimes :/ Anyways, the gist of it is, a man was robbed at "gun point" (later turned out to be a pellet gun), chased after the robber, found him and hit him with his car. The person that was hit ended up dieing from the hit.
Now, the guy was not convicted of man slaughter. My wife and I were having a discussion on it, and it got kinda heated. We finally decided that the guy should not have gotten any jail time and be let go.
What do you guys think?
He was guilty of manslaughter, if not murder.
If he had hit the guy with his car while the guy was brandishing the gun at him, it could have been considered a case of self-defense, as with a gun being waved at him he could easily claim he felt his life was in danger--because, of course, he has no way of knowing it was a pellet gun.
But to chase the guy down AFTER the gun has stopped being pointed at him, however, is an act of vengeance, not self-defense. The law does not allow for violence done in retribution. Therefore, he was guilty and quite properly should have receive a sentence, and the fact that he didn't is a miscarriage of justice.
Edited, Aug 3rd 2006 at 10:51pm EDT by Ambrya