I know I am dating myself (I am 42) by using the phrase, "sounds like a broken record." However, haven't we heard this "defense" before?
-----
"Cooper’s attorney told Judge McDonald that despite the jury’s decision, an innocent man was going to prison for a crime he did not commit. Rebecca West-Estell said Cooper had a difficult childhood and throughout his life received “the short end of the stick.”
“So here he is again, failed by a system that’s supposed to protect him,” she said. “ … What happened to Michael Heidtman is a tragedy. That tragedy is compounded because whoever did this will get away with it.”
When asked if he wanted to say anything, Cooper responded, “Trust God. That’s it.” He also indicated that he plans to appeal.
Judge McDonald noted that Cooper had spent time in prison three times, including for a 1995 manslaughter conviction for which he was certified to stand trial as an adult and was sentenced to 10 to 25 years. The judge further noted that Cooper was on parole for a drug conviction when he shot Heidtman."
Source: http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2012/09/26/Life-term-ordered-for-fatal-shooting.html
Rebecca West-Estell said Cooper had a difficult childhood and throughout his life received “the short end of the stick.”
So that makes it OK to kill a guy?
Who the living fuck comes up with these "defenses"?
OHT - That statement was the attorney in response to Cooper being found guilty, as he had maintained his innocence. That statement was not a defense. The jury apparently thought there was enough evidence to find him guilty though.
I'm not trying to justify what happened or speak ill of the deceased, but...
It's probably not the best idea in the world to try to steal crack from a crack dealer.
It's probably not the best idea in the world to try to steal crack from a crack dealer.
Gee... you think? I always thought they had cameras, you know, like Toledo Police chief Fathead was always talking about. Once the criminal sees that camera, well, it's all over.
This whole thing is business as usual. Cooper was a drug dealer. Heidtman and another low life tried to steal Cooper's drugs. Cooper retrieved the drugs and ultimately everyone went their separate ways. Then Cooper shoots Heidtman later on - at least that's what happened according to two witnesses who are doubtlessly a credit to the community and outstanding examples of good moral character. How did they happen to be there, anyway? Just handing out a few Christian religious tracts while they were on their way to choir practice?
The jury spent four hours over two days deliberating, which I would guess indicates that the case for the persecution wasn't as obvious as everyone would like to think. Yes, I think it's entirely possible that Cooper was wrongfully convicted, which means the guilty party is still out there.