A jury declined to indict a father who allegedly fatally shot his daughter in the chest following an argument about President Donald Trump.
  • TheFogan@programming.devEnglish
    481·
    10 hours ago

    The thing I find somewhat odd of the story, is if the facts are accurate, what’s even the point of the trump arguement. It feels like the article is flooded with basically details not directly related to the shooting. The “relapsed alchoholic that had 2 glasses of wine”, the topic of the arguements (and even the specific things said in them).

    Actual relevant facts of the shooting.

    Dad had an arguement with the daughter.

    Several hours later they had an arguement on guns, Dad brought out gun to show her… then claims he accidentally shot her.

    Point is the arguement doesn’t really hold relevance, Dad either horribly mishandled the firearm, in which case the situations up to it were irrelevant.

    Or dad murdered his daughter in a fit of rage.

    • WesternInfidels@feddit.onlineEnglish
      11·
      6 hours ago

      I think “Gun owner plays with his guns after drinking” is relevant to the big picture.

      I also think “Man in resentment cult has views challenged, so decides to play with guns” is relevant to the big picture.

      There is no exactly-right amount of background and context. If the story had just been “Man kills daughter, jury declines to indict,” you’d have questions.

      • TheFogan@programming.devEnglish
        3·
        6 hours ago

        Wasn’t even close to saying he shouldn’t be in jail, just saying the story puts so much emphasis on facts that literally have zero relevance to what actually happened. At bare minimum that should be manslaughter, assuming 100% of his story as true and the gun went off accidentally.

        Honestly based on the heated arguements before, I’d be skeptical and lean towards murder.