Not for me it doesn't, but it may have saved Mr. Stanley's ass.Originally Posted by Liberty.357
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Not for me it doesn't, but it may have saved Mr. Stanley's ass.
Seriously though, I looked at the evidence and I buy the hang fire story 100%. Stanley didn't even know that Boushie was armed when Boushie was shot. That's why the self defense argument wasn't used. Had Stanley knew that Boushie had a loaded rifle in his lap at the time, the self defense argument would have been justified. They went with the hang fire defense because it just happened to be the truth...
At best that takes the level of guilt from 2nd degree murder to manslaughter. Since a firearm was involved, a minimum 4 years sentence is mandatory. A more common sentence is such a case is ~9 years, with possible parole after 1/3 sentence.
If he's really gonna go through with the hangfire defense, he should definitely plead guilty. In a courtroom, there's no way to get away with killing someone by criminal negligence and not get a manslaughter conviction, but murder 2 would still be on the table. Plead guilty and you automatically take murder 2 off the table, and most likely the sentence for manslaughter would be less than after a conviction.
The charges are just aggravated assault, pointing a firearm and careless use of a firearm (was mistaken with the stanley boushie case). He pretty much admitted to pointing a firearm (duh!) and careless use of a firearm (re-duh!) which are no-jail time sentences for 1st-time offenders.
The crown is pretty much letting him off the hook already. His lawyer is taking advantage of him, billing him un-needed hours. He's already gonna have a criminal case for the small stuff, and obviously a firearm prohibition order, so pleading guilty to a reduced sentence for the aggravated assault, possibly to a reduced accusation of assault, he could get a slap on the wrist of a sentence.
Me says his lawyer likes to bill.
The hang fire defense beat the murder charge. The firearms charges are going to be harder to beat. Of course the 'safest' thing that Stanley could have done (under Canadian law) would have just been to pull his pants down and bend over for Boushie and his cohorts . Evidently that's what the government would like us all to do...
That's fine if that's what you think. I'm happy with the outcome and do not fault Stanley for doing what he had to do. The hang fire story needed to be including due to those on the jury who do not believe in self defence, as well as Canada's lack of laws protecting innocent people. As I stated before, he needed it because of that, but I would have much rather he won without it. That's Canada.... I'm glad he's safe, I hope his legal fees are paid for and then some. I am glad to help.
Eddie's case is much more important because it doesn't include any stories about a hang fire. That's why he needs more money to mount an even better defense. Hopefully Albertan juror's will stand up for what's right..
Donate to Eddie:
https://fundrazr.com/b1KjM0?ref=ab_5...mct5OhxPkLAmct
Evidently it's what the jury thought also. I guess we're all just a bunch of suckers for the proven truth...
$40,535 donated so far. I donated a few weeks ago. I'm disappointed in the amount raised so far.
Member: CPC, UCP, CSSA, and AFGA.
Not to derail the thread but with reference to Gerald Stanley, I really hope he's writing a book. The truth about Boushie and his POS cohorts needs to be told. Canada needs to hear the truth because the CBC, CTV, etc. are doing a stellar job of covering it up.
Member: CPC, UCP, CSSA, and AFGA.
Check out Battlefords Now newspaper twitter feed coverage on the Stanley trial. It has the most detailed reporting of the trial I've found.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote