Quote:
|
First the shooter would have to get caught.
|
Want to bet against that? I wouldn't even consider it. They'll be looking for him until the case is closed, and there's no statute of limitations.
Quote:
|
Depending on what the attorney thinks is best, the shooter could confess and claim self defense or not say anything and make the state prove its case.
|
I'm not sure what kind of attorney would even consider the former, but once the shooter has been caught, proving that he was in fact the shooter should be a slam dunk. "Make the state prove its case"? Come now.
Even if there were no witnesses and no security cameras--even if his cell phone did not place him near the scene of the shooting at the time of the shooting, which would help in catching him and destroy his credibility in the event of denial--the forensic evidence should nail it. Fibers, identifiable bullets and perhaps shell casings, possible gunshot residue, traceable material in his shoe treads tire treads and automobile carpets, foot tracks, tire tracks, you name it, all on top of a complete lack of credibility on the part of the defendant...where's the challenge? What's the chance?
Far better to be the first to report it and go the self defense route, unless of course the sooting was not really justified under the law.