I don't believe that matters. You have the RIGHT to a speedy trial. The accused doesn't have to actually ask for it. Just like you don't have to actually ASK for the right to free speech.
If he had killed the cop, it would be different.
But I got to go with the perp on this one.
The two lead pills he got would seem to be punishment enough.
To wait and try to prosecute a guy who’s 82 years old after forty years is wrong. I am a strong supporter of law enforcement officers, when it is justified, or condemnation isn’t fully justified, but this is beyond the pale.
An 82 year old guy isn’t capable of fully defending himself against charges dating back 40 years.
I’d also like to point out that Hays (the 82 year old perp), was left a paraplegic, which in and of itself is a terrible penalty to pay for his actions.
I am sorry the officer sustained this type of injury, and that Hays was not prosecuted in the day.
I’m pretty sure why he wasn’t. He was probably severely compromised and it would have been very hard for him to attend trial. Further, had he been convicted at that point, it would have been a real burden on the state to incarcerate and care for him.
45 years???? That’s beyond unreasonable even if he didn’t ask for a speedy trial