|
nate, I thought you were the guy who knows everything and doesn't even need to have an attorney explain the Castle Doctrine to them? If that is the case you must know all about all the reported decisions on the Castle Law so I see no need for me or anyone to take the time to look any of them up for you; especially when you already identified the pharamcist case. Or do I misunderstand you and are you saying that there are no decisions in which a shooting was ruled unjustiable because a shooter fired when the evidence showed that intruder no longer posed a threat.
|