Printable View
This is the second case in the last few months where someone charged with shooting a thief has been found not guilty by a jury. It seems juries are leaning towards the rights of property owners instead of the crooks.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamil...lton-1.4723854
That's the way it should be.
Hopefully the thieves will get the message that there is some risk involved.
There has always been a risk involved with any criminal activity, but our justice system has always gone after the person that the crime was committed against and made them out to be the " bad guys ".Quote:
Originally Posted by ysyg
As has been said, the tide is turning [ maybe ] and the jury's are hopefully sending a message to the criminal world that enough is enough.
Khill didn't kill Styres because Styres was robbing him. Khill killed Styres because he feared for his life. There is a massive difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by delmer
Apparently a civil law suit is now being launched against Khill.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4303645/p...urder-lawsuit/
I see that. My wife was a defendant in a civil suit. What the family is asking for probably won't be what they get. I am not sure how/if insurance would cover Khill. I wonder if Khill will counter-sue for emotional turmoil (reports are out that he was very distraught after the shooting).Quote:
Originally Posted by delmer
Not likely since the “defendant” is dead. They could name his estate.....but.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Dythbringer
I hope for him and his families sake he liquidated his assets long ago? Surely his lawyer would have cautioned him at some point about the after effects of a "Not guilty" verdict?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dythbringer
People don’t realize that a civil action can do more damage than a criminal charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmoose