The Charles Kinsey Situation - Man shot by cops while lying down, arms raised

[HoughMade]

How is a guy that shoots another guy lying on the ground with his hands raised found not guilty of attempted manslaughter??? Did he just try and "wound" the caregiver?

No, he accidently shot the caregiver while trying to shoot the other guy.

 

[churchmouse]

How is a guy that shoots another guy lying on the ground with his hands raised found not guilty of attempted manslaughter??? Did he just try and "wound" the caregiver?

It is pretty confusing.

 

[Sigblitz]

Leave it to a police union douchebag to really get to spinning the story. Now we have the hero cop missing the actual target, who was the autistic patient. Seems the autistic patient was going to shoot the therapist with the toy truck and the hero had no choice but to shoot to save his life. Pathetic.

https://photographyisnotacrime.com/...kill-autistic-man-instead-injuring-caretaker/

I had my reservations about this. I do remember seeing the entire cell phone video, but all I can find now is missing the discharge. The 'shooting the client' came out after talking to the police union.

 

[Sigblitz]

It's ruled on, or at least the police union version is. That is that.

 

[chipbennett]

No, he accidently shot the caregiver while trying to shoot the other guy.

So, if a non-LEO were the shooter, would the incident have resulted in a misdemeanor charge for the negligently shot person, plus an attempted manslaughter charge for the intent/attempt to shoot the intended target?

I doubt much of the concern is over an innocent bystander being injured by a negligently aimed shot; rather, the concern is over the intent/attempt to use deadly force against someone who was clearly mentally impaired (cognitively disabled?) person who posed no threat to anyone.

 

[HoughMade]

So, if a non-LEO were the shooter, would the incident have resulted in a misdemeanor charge for the negligently shot person, plus an attempted manslaughter charge for the intent/attempt to shoot the intended target?

I doubt much of the concern is over an innocent bystander being injured by a negligently aimed shot; rather, the concern is over the intent/attempt to use deadly force against someone who was clearly mentally impaired (cognitively disabled?) person who posed no threat to anyone.

I don't know how this was presented to the jury or what the jury thought, so I am just going on a basic knowledge of what happened and how the law works.

If shooting the person "clearly mentally impaired person" (keeping in mind that our after-the-fact, watched the video numerous times, read the articles opinions are irrelevant), but he negligently missed him and hit the other guy, that would be culpable negligence, which the jury found.

If the shooting of the target would have been "attempted manslaughter" or some other homicide attempt crime, then shooting the caregiver would be the same offense- transferred intent.

So, the jury could have believed shooting was allowable, but the miss was negligent...

Or regardless of the law, regardless of the jury instructions, the jury may just have believed that this was a mistake and nothing more than a misdemeanor was warranted.....jury nullification, and all.