[crickets chirp]
Uh, a.) he was 73 b.) the family said he died of natural causes c) the shooting was 33 years ago.
I know I've only taken one criminal law class in my time at Marquette, but good luck selling that shooting as the proximate cause of his death. And isn't it understood that for a wound to be responsible for a homicide it must have occurred within a year and a day of the death (at least in WI)?
If he was an average Joe, you wouldn't hear squat about such baloney. It's an attempt to garner some free press and make a pitch for gun control all, as usual, on the taxpayer dime.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Feel free to comment without signing in if you like, but please leave your name in the comment. Thanks for reading!