It does.
That's what makes it manslaughter rather than acquittal. Self defence can be a full or partial defence depending on circumstances
It does.
I presume that's where forensics gathered at the scene either support that account or not.
Why do you keep blaming the judge for the verdict of the jury?According to reports Jack Power had been drinking all day and decided Kerrie had damaged his car, he drove to Kerrie's house with two friends and broke the front window with a rock.
The judge criticised Mr. Kerrie – and this is a direct quote – for not being capable “of identifying what alternative course of action he could have taken.”
Sorry but its all well and good to say this but what was he supposed to do. Harsh language?
Your man was 25 and much bigger than him.
Kerrie used the nearest weapon he could find, who among us could say they wouldnt do similar?
Power deliberately broke into someone’s home to do them harm.
It is very easy for Judge McDermott to sit, after the event, and pronounce that the force used was excessive. He was not there.
The usual suspect's take on this sentence, of course, is that perhaps the Judge had access to more facts than we, the plebian masses do.
But that’s all well and good, only if you’re someone who looks at the record of the Irish courts and thinks “yeah, they usually get it right”.
He was found not guilty pedantic Pat.
The second jury you mean.
You say kill, I say stopping an intruder in his home protecting himself and family. Brave lad tbf @ 17. The farmer case in Mayo is worst than this because he shot the traveller in the back (I think) whilst he was fleeing. He was acquitted after appeal.
In the event of someone breaking into their house they sometimes do.
Like in the film "Twelve angry men" you mean?
All I take from this is that only 1 person had a knife. That's where excessive force comes from. If the deceased had a knife too all bets would have been off.
