Man wins new trial in shooting (Castle Law = Legalized Manslaughter, MS)

[jpak]

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Man-wins-new-trial-in-shooting-2149672.php

JACKSON, Miss. (AP) — A Walls, Miss., man charged in fatal shooting at Southaven's Performing Arts Center has won a new trial.

The state Court of Appeals ruled on Tuesday that the trial judge erred in not telling they jury that it could consider whether Justin Thomas' actions during the March 8, 2008, incident were protected by the Castle Doctrine law.

Mississippi's so-called "castle doctrine" law removes the requirement that residents must first seek a safe retreat from an intruder before using deadly force. Similar laws have passed in dozens of states.

<more>

moer castle law suckage

yup

[ProgressiveProfessor]

1. With the total lack of detail cited you can declare this suckage?

Not a real rational or practical approach there bucko

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jpak]

3. The guy was convicted of manslaughter and wants a new trial based on MS's dumbass Castle Law

Do you want this guy to walk?

:shrug:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. The Appellate Court said:"the verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence"

Thomas now appeals, asserting the following issues: (1) the denial of jury instruction D-12 regarding the Castle Doctrine hindered his right to a fair trial, and (2) the verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. As we find reversible error in regard to issue one, issue two will not be discussed.

Since it overturned on legal errors by the trial court it did not have to address the poor quality of the verdict.

If you were really interested in justice you would have looked that up rather than just tossing it up as more of your anti gun agitprop.

I want justice don't you?

[GreenStormCloud]

8. Based on the facts of his appeal, he should walk. N/T

[SteveM]

9. No, I want him to have a fair trial. So do the courts. Something wrong with that? nt

[PavePusher]

10. Well, since the judge seems to have illegaly kept information from the jury...

HELL YES.

Or do you support an arbitrary and capricious justice system? So far, the evidence says you do...

[krispos42]

15. If the process is flawed, the verdict is flawed.

If the judge's instructions to the jury were flawed, then there needs to be a retrial.

This is a universal principle. It is not dependent on Castle Doctrine, or lack thereof.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

16. So if politically inconvenient laws are to be ignored in favor of personally desired outomes

where does that leave your gun control laws?

[MicaelS]

4. Here is the Appeal

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=In%20MSCO%2020110830259.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR

[ProgressiveProfessor]

6. It seems there was much more than just a technicality on this one.

The Appellate Court was pretty clear that the trial court screwed up

[ileus]

7. This is why all states need a stand your ground law...castle doctrine isn't strong enough.

[aikoaiko]

11. We now see that jpak is against due process. How low will you go with your obsession?

[richmwill]

12. "Castle Law suckage", "Castle Law=Legalized Manslaughter"...

I'm sorry that your heart breaks so much for these poor criminals who are (sniff) just trying to get by, right? Is that your thinking?... but really, what do you expect? Tell a home intruder "Sit down on the couch, please, while I call the police and wait for them to arrive"?

[melm00se]

13. it's called due process (5th amendment)

a fair trial (6th amendment) and the right to appeal the verdict (1st and also the 6th amendment).

which of these rights are you prepared to toss?

[oneshooter]

14. He id more than willing to toss all of them, as long as it against a gun owner. n/t