Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

chitlins3

Members
  • Content Count

    151
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About chitlins3

  • Rank
    Footballguy
  • Birthday 05/06/1975

Profile Information

  • Location
    Westfield, NJ

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    New York Jets

Recent Profile Visitors

9,493 profile views
  1. My guess would be that the DA looked at the officer’s record as part of making the determination that he did not possess the required criminal mental state - if the officer did not have an exemplary record but rather had a history of questionable incidents maybe there would have been more doubt about his criminal mindset sufficient for charges to be brought.
  2. The inconsistency here could be that you have two incidents that occurred in two different states (PA and MN) with two different sets of laws. I don't know the penal code for those two states but if the PA DA quoted in the article is correct that a criminal mental state is required to be charged under PA law then that could explain why the PA officer was not charged while the MN officer was charged (i.e. the MN officer was charged under the equivalent of a criminally negligent homicide statute which does not exist in PA according to the DA's explanation).
×
×
  • Create New...