• ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    It certainly does seem that way, but frankly I think it’s a major oversight to not indict or convict him of a felony charge, it leaves him still able to purchase and he has clearly demonstrated he is a danger to himself and/or others. Again, that’s completely ignoring the DV too which is just further proof, but the court decided not I guess, still though they could have had him on some other charges it seems and IMO it was a failure of them not to.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      it’s a major oversight to not indict or convict him of a felony charge

      I don’t disagree with you in any respect. For reasons that aren’t really clear to me, courts commit major oversights of charging people every single day. Except drugs! For some reason they really like fucking people because of drugs. Punching your girlfriend and firing a weapon near some people who shouldn’t get hit with bullets strikes me as exactly one of those things that someone might some way-too-large minority of the time look at and go “you know what it’s hard to say what happened and it might be tough to prosecute, fuck it, 8 months probation, let’s go have a beer it is Friday.”