St. Louis cop charged for shooting fellow officer in Russian Roulette style "game"

[Sensei]

I’m curious about the invol manslaughter charge and how they arrived at that decision. Perhaps someone familiar with the state statutes can elaborate?

[Lon]

I’m curious about the invol manslaughter charge and how they arrived at that decision. Perhaps someone familiar with the state statutes can elaborate?

Found this. Pretty straight forward.



Or the second degree:



I’d say the first degree was the more appropriate charge.

[BehindBlueI's]

I’m curious about the invol manslaughter charge and how they arrived at that decision. Perhaps someone familiar with the state statutes can elaborate?

The statute fits. Per the facts presented, she was a willing participant to the point she also pulled the trigger with the gun pointed at him. With a Murder charge you must prove intent. Given those facts, it would be extremely difficult to convince a jury his intent was to kill her. Manslaughter/criminal recklessness only requires intent to do the given act (ie, handle the gun in an unsafe manner) and doesn't require the prosecutor to prove a specific intent to hurt or kill the victim(s).

[Sensei]

I’m just a little taken by the allegation that a single bullet had been placed in the cylinder and the trigger had been pulled 3 times prior to the supposed victim being shot. That seems to indicate an intention to carry this game forward until someone was dead.

[Jason M]

I smell hazing.

This forum is not sufficiently anonymous for me to say what I think non-officer hendren should do to himself.

I do not know enough to have a belief what the other officer should do, but a different career would be a place to start.

Or... Is this an extramarital affair that ended with an intentional killing and a goofy story to make it something other than murder?

[olstyn]

I’m just a little taken by the allegation that a single bullet had been placed in the cylinder and the trigger had been pulled 3 times prior to the supposed victim being shot. That seems to indicate an intention to carry this game forward until someone was dead.

Well, it did say the cylinder was spun an additional time between the first and second trigger pulls. That would reset the odds. Not spinning it again between pull 2 and pull 3 does make the story lean toward your theory on intent, though. Regardless, anyone who [willingly] plays that "game" scores VERY high on metrics for idiot *and* asshole.

[willie]

Gun play indicates ignorance tinged with careless stupidity. I think they were stupid.

[Sensei]

Well, it did say the cylinder was spun an additional time between the first and second trigger pulls. That would reset the odds. Not spinning it again between pull 2 and pull 3 does make the story lean toward your theory on intent, though. Regardless, anyone who [willingly] plays that "game" scores VERY high on metrics for idiot *and* asshole.

I didn’t see that part in the article. Thanks.

[BehindBlueI's]

I’m just a little taken by the allegation that a single bullet had been placed in the cylinder and the trigger had been pulled 3 times prior to the supposed victim being shot. That seems to indicate an intention to carry this game forward until someone was dead.

Perhaps, but can you prove that beyond a reasonable doubt. Can you prove his intent was to kill her?

When you charge a crime you have to be able to prove every element in the statute. Say you rob a gas station by passing a note that reads "I have a gun and will shoot you if you don't give me the money in the register". You don't display a gun. If I charge you with armed robbery, I can prove beyond a reasonable doubt you took money from the clerk, and I can prove beyond a reasonable doubt you threatened her with violence. What I can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt is you were actually armed, saying you are isn't enough to overcome reasonable doubt. I failed to prove one of the required elements and that will result in a "not guilty" verdict because while you committed a crime, it wasn't the one you were charged with. Exact same circumstance, but with a strong arm robbery charge, the result is a "guilty" verdict because that crime only requires the first two elements. You took something from the presence of a person and that you did to with violence or the threat of violence.

Same here. Murder requires a specific intent to kill, barring a death resulting from committing certain other crimes such as Robbery. You're going to need sufficient evidence to prove that element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, or you lose. The charges filed are appropriate from a legal standpoint, as the individual elements are readily provable.

[blues]

Or... Is this an extramarital affair that ended with an intentional killing and a goofy story to make it something other than murder?

Like you, I'm having more than a little trouble buying into the 'Russian roulette' story on any level. This flimsy web of deceit will be torn asunder, imho.