Sometimes there's an error on the warrant. Discovering the error is a question to be taken to court ~ not by blowing out the cop's brains.
In the same place (Indianapolis) a couple of cops drove by a man's fenced yard and saw his dogs outside romping and playing.
The cops stopped, shot the dogs, and then ran into the man's home guns drawn to DO SOMETHING.
He shot them dead.
What they'd done in shooting his dogs ~ with no warrent, and then entering his dwelling with guns drawn ~ with no warrant, and not in hot pursuit since having your dogs loose in your own yard behind a fence is not a crime, made them fair game ~ but he acted in self defense. He'd seen the cops enter his yard, kill his dogs, and break down his door. He had a reasonable belief that they were after him ~ and that they might not even be cops ~ so he shot them.
Virtually all the time you will NEVER encounter that situation. BTW, the court let him walk ~ his actions were ruled justifiable homicide in an act of self-defense.
At the other end of the line you have a situation where a woman called the cops to come to her apartment because her ex, who was MOVING OUT, was busting up her stuff.
When they arrived he even told the cops he was moving out.
You cannot address the points of law in this case without considering the rights of the woman to call the cops for assistance! Not in American law you can't ~ in Sharia Law you can ~ not in American Law.
>Look here a moment ~ sometimes people end up someplace by accident ~ you’ve done it yourself. There is no death penalty authorized for making a mistake.
Oh, yes, there is.
There is no ‘undo’ on the battle field; there are many, many situations where this simple witticism may be correctly applied to life.
>Sometimes there’s an error on the warrant. Discovering the error is a question to be taken to court ~ not by blowing out the cop’s brains.
And how many citizens have died or been injured due those selfsame errors? (Think especially hard about SWAT team mobilizations.)
>You cannot address the points of law in this case without considering the rights of the woman to call the cops for assistance!
I already laid out a chain of reasoning wherein you can; it might not sit well with you but it exists: they could have looked exclusively at the jury-instructions and the claims of the man (concerning those instructions).
>Not in American law you can’t ~ in Sharia Law you can ~ not in American Law.
I’ve asked for references here; it may be absolutely true, but this is a case wherein I am going after what I can *prove* in court. That is why I structured my argument the way I did: considering the federal implication of the decision (4th Amd & Art 6, of the US Constitution) as well as the State (the Indiana State Constitution and the 14th Amendment prohibiting the States from abridging due process)... effectively that covers both the cases.