|
scrubcedar, if I understand the way the system works, the problem with your argument is that a decision not to charge by the DA does not actually set any legal precedent.
If I understand things correctly, precedent won't be set until a situation results in a trial, a verdict is rendered, and that verdict is appealed. IE, the lowest level at which a binding precedent is set is at the appellate level, and even then that precedent only applies to courts under the jurisidiction of that appellate court - although it can be used in an advisory capacity by courts outside the jurisdiction of the appellate court.
So, until you can cite cases in your area that have been successfully appealed (in favor of the shooter), you are basically gambling on the interpretations of the DA you draw, and the jury you draw. (Again, assuming my understanding is correct - I am NOT a lawyer.)
|