• Madison420@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    They weren’t, they went over this in the trial.

    He became the aggressor when he removed barriers to entry and laid in wait which is a negative defense for self defense.

    • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Wikipedia says they broke a window to enter, and that can be heard on audio—I’m not trying to argue with everything, but how is a closed window that had to be broken for entry not a barrier?

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        23 hours ago

        They did, read the testimony. He has the window blocked and he removed it so the window would be the easiest way to enter.

        He set a trap, there’s no legitimate purpose for that.

        • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          23 hours ago

          The dude clearly murdered them and had violent vigilante fantasies—I don’t argue that one bit.

          That said, they still came up to his house, broke a window, and entered with the intention to burgle it. It doesn’t really matter if the window was previously blocked or made of paper—breaking and entering with the intention of burglary is a crime, and having no block on a window isn’t enticement to have your house burgled.

          Again, before anyone thinks I’m defending him, I fully agree that he is a murderer. I just think the burglars weren’t innocent either. In Reddit lingo, “everyone sucks here”.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            22 hours ago

            You are defending him boss.

            The jury took less than three hours to establish as a matter of fact that none of the shootings were justified or in defense. It’s a fact now, your opinion is just that… An opinion and one not backed by either statute or the court case.

            • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              20 hours ago

              I already requested the link for the info you are referencing, and I have told you where I found mine. Please provide a source, I would like to learn.

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                20 hours ago

                I did!

                The court transcripts which I’ve read, you haven’t and I’m not your goddamn mom. You know the source, go get it for yourself.

                Ed: also https://lemmy.world/comment/14056314

                Maybe read more, I already said I’d look for my copy. I’m not magic and I’m not your mom, it will take some time and I also no no legitimate reason to do your legwork. I directed to where and how to gain the transcript to which you said you simply don’t have the time. So what’s your actual complaint, that I’m not doing it fast enough for the lord-god whatever the fuck your name is?

          • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            23 hours ago

            If you’re arguing that both the murderer and murder victims “suck” maybe you need to rethink your priorities…