My guess? The video alone isn't proof it was an actual gun. Unless they were able to recover the gun, and maintain the chain of custody regarding handling evidence, it would seem like a large mountain to climb for a prosecutor to get a conviction.
High chance he passed that gun off to a comrade before going to the hospital. With only the video and photos as evidence I don't see a really strong case unfortunately.
And the defense could argue there are pretty detailed replicas out there as well. Which there are.
You really expect them to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt based off this evidence alone? Even I wouldn't convict him if that charge based on only that evidence. And I'm one of the people that are disappointed that Kyle misses and merely hit him in the arm.
From what we know, the evidence just isn't there that would lead to a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.
Slot machine said he wished he emptied his weapon into Kyle. This removes all doubt. You also see slot machine taking it out of his waistband over the course of a long haul. You wouldn't do that with a replica.
My guess? The video alone isn't proof it was an actual gun. Unless they were able to recover the gun, and maintain the chain of custody regarding handling evidence, it would seem like a large mountain to climb for a prosecutor to get a conviction. High chance he passed that gun off to a comrade before going to the hospital. With only the video and photos as evidence I don't see a really strong case unfortunately.
There were some pretty detailed photos as well.
And the defense could argue there are pretty detailed replicas out there as well. Which there are. You really expect them to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt based off this evidence alone? Even I wouldn't convict him if that charge based on only that evidence. And I'm one of the people that are disappointed that Kyle misses and merely hit him in the arm. From what we know, the evidence just isn't there that would lead to a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.
If you point a 'replica' at someone with a loaded rifle you are a special kind of stupid.
If you point a replica at someone it's legally no different than pointing a real gun at them.
No shit. But in terms of the law they obviously can't prove it was an actual gun.
No proof of an actual gun means it likely being an acquital, if he even gets charged. Which he hasn't.
Slot machine said he wished he emptied his weapon into Kyle. This removes all doubt. You also see slot machine taking it out of his waistband over the course of a long haul. You wouldn't do that with a replica.
Even if you can't prove it was a gun, the fact that it looked like one is enough to make it brandishing or menacing depending on local law.
That's not the question though. That's a separate argument not based on the one I was having with the original poster.
Yes he could have been arrested for assault with a deadly weapon.
But conviction as a result of unlawfully carrying of a firearm? Highly unlikely.
What about the couple who had their guns out on their own property? Why were they charged?
They weren’t. Charges were dropped.