mung wrote:
It should be pretty easy for a prosecutor to argue excessive force. I don't think they can get murder to stick, but manslaughter should be cake. In fact, let's take a step back. Why was the use of the taser even justified at the point he used it? Who was the one who escalated the situation? I think it is going to be very easy to show that Slager had many other options at his disposal rather than turn a broken taillight into a shooting.
You may be right, Mung but I would not bet on Manslaughter even. I await the evidence.. as Froggie outlines.
I am FED UP with the Corey-esque game of OVERCHARGING as a ploy to ensure some lesser charge as a "consolation verdict" by a Jury. A "Consolation Verdict" is NOT justice at all. It is a blatant ploy. It sets up the "trial by media" and play on emotions and sympathy for "victim's" family.
A trial is SUPPOSED to be about FACTS and not emotion and feelings of sympathy. Judges often state that in Jury instructions.. but Jury members are human.. it get in and some (most) prosecutors play to it. Jim Guy has provided some clear examples .. over the top examples.. in both the Zimmerman and Wafer trials.
So IF the prosecution think the evidence in this case proves "Manslaughter" they should charge manslaughter.
A point that seems to get overlooked.
Although cops are not "above the law", their circumstance IS not the same as a private citizen. They are trained and AUTHORIZED to use deadly force for instance. You can not view a cops actions exactly the same as you would same actions by a private citizen. For instance... A cop MAY well have a duty to stop a fleeing felon... part of his "Job" to protect citizens beyond himself and immediate surroundings.