|
|
Post by movieliker on Jan 27, 2018 5:25:26 GMT
Ronald Gasser (white) was found guilty of Manslaughter (3rd degree murder) in the murder case against him for killing Joe McKnight (black). "the crime of killing a human being without malice aforethought, or otherwise in circumstances not amounting to murder."www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2018/01/ronald_gasser_joe_mcknight_tri.htmlNo details about the verdict have been released other than what is in the above article. But the detail from the investigation and trial that got me was "Gasser said he got off the GNO/Westbank Expy on the Gen. DeGalle exit just to pursue McKnight. Otherwise, he would normally stay on the Westbank Expy." Like I said in the other thread, Gasser said, in accordance with the law, he feared for his life when he shot McKnight. Who gets off at a different exit to follow somebody --- for 5 miles through heavy rush hour traffic, traffic lights and turns --- that they are supposedly afraid of? In case anybody is wondering; 1rst degree murder - premeditated murder 2nd degree murder - crime of passion (your wife makes you so mad you kill her in a rage) 3rd degree murder - no intent or premeditation (guilty person is engaging in wreckless, irresponsible behavior that results in the death of another) Jury deliberated for seven and a half hours. Gasser could have gotten a life sentence if found guilty of 2nd degree murder. The most he can get now is 40 years. What do you think? |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 27, 2018 12:30:48 GMT
That's certainly the sentence that did it for him and, if that is the case, then he is guilty.
I'm pretty sure he would have got away with it if he had kept his mouth shut.
Thanks for the update. Seems like justice will be served.
(BTW, when I saw your subject line, I thought, "Shit! What have I done??")
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Jan 27, 2018 16:15:08 GMT
That's certainly the sentence that did it for him and, if that is the case, then he is guilty. I'm pretty sure he would have got away with it if he had kept his mouth shut. Thanks for the update. Seems like justice will be served. (BTW, when I saw your subject line, I thought, "Shit! What have I done??") Sorry if I frightened you. But I wanted to get your attention. Well, I guess the black community will be happy. Finally, they have a white who killed a black guy found guilty by the courts. Still, McKnight was foolish to get out of his car and lean into Gasser's. But I guess he paid for that mistake. |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 27, 2018 17:13:14 GMT
Still, McKnight was foolish to get out of his car and lean into Gasser's. But I guess he paid for that mistake. Okay, I'm confused now. It was proven that he leaned into his car? If so, surely it's self defence and it doesn't matter if Gasser followed McKnight. I was assuming the defence could not prove that he leaned in, so all they have is Gasser's statement that he followed him, which shows some kind of intent. |
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Jan 27, 2018 17:59:06 GMT
Still, McKnight was foolish to get out of his car and lean into Gasser's. But I guess he paid for that mistake. Okay, I'm confused now. It was proven that he leaned into his car? If so, surely it's self defence and it doesn't matter if Gasser followed McKnight. I was assuming the defence could not prove that he leaned in, so all they have is Gasser's statement that he followed him, which shows some kind of intent. No. I don't know what the law is in Britain. But in Louisiana (and probably around the US) the fact that Gasser followed, chased and continually threatened McKnight cancels out his claim of self-defense. In order to prove you had the legal right to kill somebody in self-defense, you must convince the law that you feared for your physical well being, or life. Gasser could not have been in fear of McKnight if he chased him for 5 miles on a different route than he normally took home. McKnight was not chasing Gasser. Gasser could easily have continued home and no longer been in danger of McKnight. By continually chasing McKnight, the law determined Gasser was looking for a chance to hurt or kill McKnight. To bait another and to excite violence is a crime in the United States. 3rd degree murder (manslaughter) is to act recklessly and irresponsibly in a way that could end in the death of another person. The jury found that if Gasser had not pursued McKnight, McKnight would still be alive. Yes, getting out of his car and leaning into Gasser's in this situation was illegal. And that is why I said McKnight paid for that mistake. But chasing McKnight and continually threatening McKnight for 5 miles, was a irresponsibly reckless act that led to McKnight's death --- was also illegal. Both were guilty. Both paid for their crimes with their lives. McKnight is dead. And potentially, Gasser will die in prison. |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 27, 2018 18:53:51 GMT
No. I don't know what the law is in Britain. But in Louisiana (and probably around the US) the fact that Gasser followed, chased and continually threatened McKnight cancels out his claim of self-defense. In order to prove you had the legal right to kill somebody in self-defense, you must convince the law that you feared for your physical well being, or life. Gasser could not have been in fear of McKnight if he chased him for 5 miles on a different route than he normally took home. Yes, that makes sense. I suspect that it's the same here and I just wasn't thinking it through. You are right - killing in self-defence means yu must fear for your life and if that had been the case, he would have got away instead of following. Seems like McK did nothing wrong until the last moment. If he had just stood by his car, G would probably have seen someone much larger than him and driven away. |
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Jan 27, 2018 19:14:25 GMT
No. I don't know what the law is in Britain. But in Louisiana (and probably around the US) the fact that Gasser followed, chased and continually threatened McKnight cancels out his claim of self-defense. In order to prove you had the legal right to kill somebody in self-defense, you must convince the law that you feared for your physical well being, or life. Gasser could not have been in fear of McKnight if he chased him for 5 miles on a different route than he normally took home. Yes, that makes sense. I suspect that it's the same here and I just wasn't thinking it through. You are right - killing in self-defence means yu must fear for your life and if that had been the case, he would have got away instead of following. Seems like McK did nothing wrong until the last moment. If he had just stood by his car, G would probably have seen someone much larger than him and driven away. Thanks for clarifying. I was wondering what you thought. |
|
