The bottom line is that it clearly appears to be a "bad shoot", in that she and her son were not in danger of death or grave bodily injury, etc.

However, she was apparently charged with first degree murder, which can be punishable by death, and I think the not guilty verdict was appropriate given what we know. A "not guilty" verdict does NOT mean that she is not guilty of killing him. In this case it doesn't even mean that she is not guilty of murdering him. It means that the prosecution could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt all elements of the crime, which in this case includes malice aforethought.

Even if she said "I shot him to keep him from getting away because I didn't want to lose my money, but I didn't mean to kill him", she should be found not guilty of first degree murder.

Wrong charge, big gamble by prosecutor that didn't pay off.

quote:

Originally posted by jc91087:
I find it crazy that she isn't charged because they brought the wrong degree of murder against her.

There you have it. Prosecutor overcharged, and this is what happens. 2nd degree or manslaughter would have been a guaranteed conviction (probably).

As to bondsman revoking their clients bonds, and taking them back in custody to deliver back to the jail, you better be a bad MFer to be a citizen that takes felons into custody. People recognize the police uniform and badge, and "mostly" comply with police. They sure as shit don't like the idea of a citizen taking them into custody and taking them back to jail.

We had a bondsman get into a shootout with a "client" when he revoked his bond and tried to take him in to custody here a few years ago.

This lady is entirely unqualified to be a bondsman. Lets hope she gets her license revoked.