Quote:
|
They weren't. They tried to get him of murder with intent, but he would still be faced with charges of involuntary killing.
|
Not in the slightest, all that would matter if that was the case is making an arguement that he shot him but didn't intend to kill him.
But the actual arguement was if he was shot in the back while leaving or not, nothing more was really attempted...well apart from the mental one which involved proving that he thought he was acting in self defence....which fell apart because a reasonable arguement would be that if someone is running away they are not at that moment threatening so you are not shooting in self defence.
Sorry Betanov but you chose an example to prove your case about self defence where the lawyers chose a defence of their client that shows you were incorrect, since then you have been backpedalling like mad while still trying to claim it still stands correct.