Was it someone upset with Kirk? We need a side by side pick of Kirk and the victim along with a report of the shooters last trip to the eye doctor.
Hopefully this one stays away for a long time. I see no reason for this individual to see the light of day again
. . ., assuming they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
Is that a comment about the Prosecutor's Office or the potential jury pool?
It's about the Constitution.
I find it interesting, the plea of "innocent" He did it, he said he did it, mistaken identity or not, and the plea is innocent. Give me a break. Time to buy rope. Maybe more than one.
Any particular amendment in mind?
Screw that. Fire five bullets at him. At least we'd know that he wasn't the wrong person (by his own admission).
You mean other than the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth of the United States Constitution and Article I §12, 13 and 14 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana?
Other than that, no, not really anything in mind.
I'm a Business Administration major so I'll take a different approach here skipping a few steps in the standard root cause analysis methodology. You had a neighbor murdered and you're concerned this dirtbag is going to walk due to involuntary self-incrimination, insufficient legal support or not receiving a speedy trial? Usually this involves an Ishikawa diagram or the 5 whys.
This all seems to hinge on the word of one associate of someone who murdered an art teacher.
How do you come to that conclusion? The neighbors who put the Defendant there, those in the car with the D, D's own alleged statements and whatever forensic evidence the cops have, inter alia.