I don't think it's strange or "off" to investigate a case where multiple people died. Just because you killed people in your home doesn't make you immune to investigation, or else people who'd lure others into their homes to kill them would not be able to be prosecuted if they could always fall back to the "it was in self defense" argument.
I'd like to quite that passage too:
I do think that the coverage just blew the "tried for murder" a bit out of proportion. That rather seems to be the very unlikely worst case scenario.
And as a disclaimer: nope, I don't side with the assailants, and I too think that man acted couragously and was in the right to do so. I just think that any case that involves people getting killed should be invesigated thoroughly.
I'd like to quite that passage too:
Which sounds like it's jut the way it should work. After all, it is the job of courts to judge if an act was justified or not..."But in this case, the criminals broke into his house and threatened the lives of his family members. It will be recognized as legitimate self-defense, and a criminal case is likely to fail,” he said. “The maximum he faces is interrogations. It is impossible to qualify his actions as criminal.”
I do think that the coverage just blew the "tried for murder" a bit out of proportion. That rather seems to be the very unlikely worst case scenario.
And as a disclaimer: nope, I don't side with the assailants, and I too think that man acted couragously and was in the right to do so. I just think that any case that involves people getting killed should be invesigated thoroughly.
Last edited:
Upvote
0