None of this makes any sense. I have work plenty of 13 hour shift and it doesn't make me forget where I live
And even if she did really think it was her apartment, how was your immediate reaction to open fire especially when the two knew each other and had even dated in the past
I think this goes back to police training. Police are trained to react as if they're on the streets of Mogadishu
Whereas military actually trains their personnel when and when not to use deadly force
Also an innocent man was murdered in his own apartment so can we stop coddling Her Like She's the victim here?
Facts are facts until proven otherwise. This is the only way to judge. All the extra speculations shouldnt cloud judgment because they haven't been proven. Yhe only information they had was basically the shooters testimony. Is it reasonable that after working long hours that your brain may be sluggish?
Yes it is medically reasonable Mental fatigue may manifest in different ways for each person.
Difficulty concentrating and solving problems, anxiety, irritability with co-workers and loss of passion for work are potential symptoms of mental fatigue. Other symptoms include sleeplessness and
confusion or frustration triggered by problem-solving tasks like simple math.
Technically by the testimony she saw a black (shadowy) outline of a person.
And no I did training with police officers. They teach use of force also. The Judiciary system works off of a standard called
Beyond a reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof that must be met in any trial. In civil litigation, the standard of proof is either proof by a preponderance of the evidence or proof by clear and convincing evidence. These are lower burdens of proof. A preponderance of the evidence simply means that one side has more evidence in its favor than the other, even by the smallest degree.
Clear and Convincing Proof is evidence that establishes a high probability that the fact sought to be proved is true.
The main reason that the high proof standard of reasonable doubt is used in criminal trials is that such proceedings can result in the deprivation of a defendant's liberty or even in his or her death. These outcomes are far more severe than in civil trials, in which money damages are the common remedy.
Because of vagueness of evidence this leads to doubt on if she murdered him by malice or premeditated. As to why the judge and jury responded the way they did.
Looking at the only known evidence the judge and jury did a good job.
2
1
