
Originally Posted by
johncar54
In cross examination he was asked about his firearms training. He said that it would only be in the very last resort that he would be permitted to fire.
That is more or less the same as in UK. That is when he was directly threatened with a lethal weapon and could not do anything but use his weapon, it would be justified.
Thus when he fired at the door knowing that someone was on the other side, but not being threatened at all, he was admitting in effect murder.
That he got acquitted of course does not mean he was ‘not guilty’. He got off.
If they have the balls to appeal he could easily be convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment.