HARRYM
NES Member
Why did the defendant follow the victim, huge error. You just put yourself in a situation where you run into a person high on fentanyl that will turn the tables on you.Again, I didn't see all of the testimony so this issue may have been covered, but here is why I think a defense expert was necessary:
Everyone is an armchair quarterback. Everyone will "shoulda-woulda-coulda" a situation from behind their computer screens. Nobody had felt what the defendant had felt at the moment. Evidence was presented that a man high on fentanyl had gotten out of his car in the middle of the street to confront the driver of the car behind him, and strike the driver's side door window breaking the glass. People on this forum would be of the mind that this is justified as self defense. The general public I am not so confident in. Do they appreciate the threat? Do they understand things like target fixation or tunnel vision? Do they understand that the defendant had only a moment to act based only on information known to him at that very moment?
Is it sad that a man died? Sure it is. Is it sad that the wife and kid were there? Sure it is. Because it is sad, does that make the defendant's act criminal? No it does not!. How will the juror's judge it? I would hate to find out first hand.
I did not read that the victim was high on fentanyl and I have wondered several times if the victim had broken the shooters drivers door window.
Indeed, a mess and someone is dead. Cluster trucks usually do not end well.