Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy
Quote:
|
But it does not mean that it was legal.
|
Sorry, I was defaulting to the local authority.
|
Sorry, but that doesn't quite work with the Ersland case.
It's true that Ersland was prosecuted (and convicted) for shooting the robbery on the ground, not shooting at the one running out the door. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the prosecutor concluded that Ersland's chasing and shooting at the robber running out the door was justified.
It's entirely possible that the DA decided that the shooting of the incapacitated robber lying on the floor was by far the most obvious and strongest case. Therefore he might not have wanted to complicate the case by adding the other one. That's a kind of tactical decision that prosecutors make all the time.