Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Defense Attorney Critical...
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BadgeBunny" data-source="post: 1566587" data-attributes="member: 1242"><p>I see where you are coming from I just don't agree that the defense team was incompetent or that there was any doubt that Parker was still alive based on the evidence presented. I will give you that Parker's being "alive" most probably was in the narrowest sense only and that he was "on his way out" as it were but even brain dead folks on life-support are considered alive by legal definition so as long as there is a heartbeat then Parker was alive.</p><p></p><p>Box was ethically bound to go with the defense Ersland wanted. Some folks take their attorney's advice, some don't. I don't know what Box and his team advised Ersland to do so I can't comment to that. But given Ersland's actions during and after the shooting (and based on my experience over the years) I'm guessing that Ersland was a difficult client to deal with, at best. I think we can both agree that he has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be his own worst enemy.</p><p></p><p>Let's say for the sake of argument that Box discredited the ME's report to the jury's satisfaction. That still doesn't solve the problem of the overwhelming evidence showing that Parker 1) still had a heartbeat and 2) was not moving and therefore was not a threat. </p><p></p><p>If Ersland had said "Opps ... yeah ... in the heat of the moment I fired 5 shots into a person who was not moving and not a threat ... Looking back I think he was dead but I just couldn't help myself" then I think he might have gotten off with the lesser charge of manslaughter or even just desecrating a dead body. Maybe not even gone to trial at all.</p><p></p><p>Unfortunately (from a strictly strategic standpoint legally) he did not do that. It was Ersland's own insistence that Parker was still alive and still a threat that hung him.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BadgeBunny, post: 1566587, member: 1242"] I see where you are coming from I just don't agree that the defense team was incompetent or that there was any doubt that Parker was still alive based on the evidence presented. I will give you that Parker's being "alive" most probably was in the narrowest sense only and that he was "on his way out" as it were but even brain dead folks on life-support are considered alive by legal definition so as long as there is a heartbeat then Parker was alive. Box was ethically bound to go with the defense Ersland wanted. Some folks take their attorney's advice, some don't. I don't know what Box and his team advised Ersland to do so I can't comment to that. But given Ersland's actions during and after the shooting (and based on my experience over the years) I'm guessing that Ersland was a difficult client to deal with, at best. I think we can both agree that he has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be his own worst enemy. Let's say for the sake of argument that Box discredited the ME's report to the jury's satisfaction. That still doesn't solve the problem of the overwhelming evidence showing that Parker 1) still had a heartbeat and 2) was not moving and therefore was not a threat. If Ersland had said "Opps ... yeah ... in the heat of the moment I fired 5 shots into a person who was not moving and not a threat ... Looking back I think he was dead but I just couldn't help myself" then I think he might have gotten off with the lesser charge of manslaughter or even just desecrating a dead body. Maybe not even gone to trial at all. Unfortunately (from a strictly strategic standpoint legally) he did not do that. It was Ersland's own insistence that Parker was still alive and still a threat that hung him. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Defense Attorney Critical...
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom