The police also indicated that the non-resident individual was charged with offences related to home invasion, is known to police, and had an active arrest warrant out.
Considering that farmer guy got away with shooting the native kid in the face a few years ago, I don’t think these charges will stick if it’s just “stabbing is fine, but he stabbed too much.”
A good defense attorney will turn everything you just said against the prosecution. Everything you said was conjuncture, not supported by facts. That the police charged both men means the facts are undetermined, and they are leaving it up to a court of law to sort through. Break-and-enter is not home invasion. It is a broad catch-all.
Good thing I’m not an attorney, solicitor, or barrister, but rather some random on the internet commenting on what information is available to us and referencing a previous case where violence was used by someone claiming defense of their home.
Do you mean you are just some know-nothing highly opinionated blabbermouth who goes on spouting garbage that they have absolutely no knowledge of, just to look important and sound impressive?
Suppose a stray bullet from that gun had killed an innocent child sleeping in her bed, if you mean the Vaughan incident? We are seeing far too many innocent bystanders being killed and injured in these ‘right to defend’ cases.
The police also indicated that the non-resident individual was charged with offences related to home invasion, is known to police, and had an active arrest warrant out.
Considering that farmer guy got away with shooting the native kid in the face a few years ago, I don’t think these charges will stick if it’s just “stabbing is fine, but he stabbed too much.”
A good defense attorney will turn everything you just said against the prosecution. Everything you said was conjuncture, not supported by facts. That the police charged both men means the facts are undetermined, and they are leaving it up to a court of law to sort through. Break-and-enter is not home invasion. It is a broad catch-all.
Good thing I’m not an attorney, solicitor, or barrister, but rather some random on the internet commenting on what information is available to us and referencing a previous case where violence was used by someone claiming defense of their home.
Do you mean you are just some know-nothing highly opinionated blabbermouth who goes on spouting garbage that they have absolutely no knowledge of, just to look important and sound impressive?
No.
Just clarifying your comment and observation.
Suppose a stray bullet from that gun had killed an innocent child sleeping in her bed, if you mean the Vaughan incident? We are seeing far too many innocent bystanders being killed and injured in these ‘right to defend’ cases.