Steve Pope wrote:
> sf > wrote:
>> "Pete C." >
>
>>> The claim that the officer in question meant to draw the tazer would be
>>> supported or not by their reaction in the seconds following the
>>> shooting. I don't recall the video of the shooting, but it should be
>>> clear if there was a reaction of shock / horror on the officer's part
>>> indicating it was really a mistake.
>
>>I believe there was and that's why he got a lighter sentence.

The video was popular for a while. It's clear he thought it was a taser
until he pulled the trigger and the wrong thing happened. He was
astonished and mortified. It was tragic.

> The problem with the "I thought it was my Taser" defense is that
> any cop could claim such a defense in any shooting. If a defendant
> makes a statement that is information-free in the sense that any defendant
> could make the same statement, the jurors should ignore it and should
> be instructed to ignore it.

So they should pay attention to the video that tells what actually
happened.

> I'm guessing the Taser Corporation salesmen are now telling their
> cop customers that they need to always carry a Taser so they
> can use the Taser Defense.

And video tape *everything*. Sure. There are lots of times when a perp
is shown the video and stops asking for a jury trial and accepts a plea.