posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 10:09 AM
Originally posted by alyosha1981
I gonna go with the facts we have for now, but even so he still had other options besides to shoot.
WONDERFUL, we have an eyewitness to the scene! That is the only way you could both stick to the facts and claim he had other options. You must have
been there if you know his options were numerous.
If you want to stick to the facts, then stick to them.
You know a man with his family was attacked and you know he shot them in the altercation. That is what you know. You know he is an off duty cop, and
you know it happened at a baseball game. That is what you know, and probably all you know.
All I know is if I was carrying, got hit in the head with some sort of item causing a head wound, and saw two men coming at me and my family, my
children, I wouldn't second guess myself when I decided to shoot them.
Now if the guys were running away and he shot them, then by all means, lock the guy up. But if the two men who were shot were not running away, or
just standing there idle after throwing the bottle, force was warranted.
You have just been attacked, hit in the head. Two men are coming toward you, assuming they aren't standing there idle or running away. That is an
incredibly pressuring and dangerous situation, especially with your family there.
Further more, I would find it hard to believe that he would have shot them if they were just standing there idle or running away. If he were capable
of doing that, he would have done it on the job already, where he was more likely to get away with it.