I'm not sure how the jury could have failed to understand her side of the story. It was pretty straightforward. She was tired, she went to the wrong apartment. She then made a series of bad judgment calls (entering the apartment without calling for backup, shooting without clearly identifying her target / determining whether he was armed, failing to use first aid supplies she had with her, etc).WildBill wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 2:17 pmI think that is why the judge allowed the castle doctrine defense, so the defense couldn't use that on appeal.Soccerdad1995 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 1:35 pmIANAL, but I think that if there was a procedural error, such as improperly excluding testimony, then the case gets reverted back and can be re-tried (with the relevant testimony included). So not a complete reversal and freedom, but definitely a better outcome for the defendant than where she is at right now. Worst case, she ends up in the same exact spot.C-dub wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:08 pmWOW
When they appeal, I wonder how much of the testimony this jury didn’t get to hear will be presented or allowed. Then if this is overturned that’s it, right? It doesn’t go down to manslaughter, right?
And if that happens she is free because they dumped their mag in this trial with regards to convicting on murder instead of manslaughter.
I am not sure about the other testimony - she did allow some testimony from DPS that related to state of mind.
The figures about how many other people went to the wrong apartments is a different story. I guess we will have to wait and see.
I understand why the defendant was allowed to testify, but I think it may have backfired. Although I don't know what else they could
have done to present their side of the story.
I think the jury heard her side and decided that she was guilty. Maybe it will get overturned on appeal and another jury might see things differently.