A lawyer has an opinion. Well that settles it, then. But note that Branca agrees she would have a good SD case if instead she had shot him. All we need to do in order to find for him on SD is pretend that nothing he did meets the legal definition of recklessness. Sorry, but there is an argument to be made there.
Tex. Penal Code § 6.03 – Definitions of Culpable Mental States
A person acts intentionally, or with intent, with respect to the nature of his conduct or to a result of his conduct…texas.public.law
"A person acts recklessly, or is reckless, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor’s standpoint."
Yeah sure, in the 2 seconds before the shot he was out of options. What of it? When I saw the video, I couldn't believe he was standing right in front of the window, that far away from it, pointing a gun and a flashlight into it. What happened to slicing the pie? Windows don't count?
Maybe the prosecution was Rittenhouse-like. Sorry to hear it.
They each had seif defense rights, if she shot him it would be the same thing. It’s a bad situation but legally there was no crime.