New Republic reporter Yishai Schwartz points out the central problem
with prosecuting Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for the Michael
Brown shooting: Under Missouri law, you're pretty much allowed to shoot
anyone.[W]e expect situations of justified violence and legal killing to
be the rare exception, and most people would probably imagine that
policemen and citizens raising claims of justifiable homicide must meet a
substantive burden of proof. But in Missouri, these justifications
barely require any evidence at all. [...]
Instead, as long as there
is a modicum of evidence and reasonable plausibility in support of a
self-defense claim, a court must accept the claim and acquit the
accused. The prosecution must not only prove beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant committed the crime, but also disprove a defendant's
claim of self-defense to the same high standard. Under Missouri law, all
a citizen claiming self-defense or a police officer claiming to have
fired while pursuing a dangerous criminal need do is "inject the issue
of justification." In other words, he only needs to produce some
evidence (his own testimony counts) supporting the claim. Once he does
so, "any reasonable doubt on the issue requires a finding for the
defendant."
No comments:
Post a Comment