DA Drops Murder Charge in Schellenger Case (Pittsburgh, Penn: crimes, lawyer)

[Kamms]

Originally Posted by 1ondoner

How did you find/figure out that Schellenger wanted to disarm White? Where is the evidence?

It's called spit-balling, like several of us did here when this first happened. Like pretty anything today, spit-balling goes off the charts quickly because there's way too many emotional hemophiliacs today.

How did you figure out that Schellenger wasn't trying to disarm White?

That said, the jury voted and it looks like Schellenger learned a very hard lesson.

[1ondoner]

Sorry, courts rely on evidence.

BTW, I think White should do time for manslaughter. What I don't understand is what business Schellenger had to engage him. That was pure stupidity, there's no excuse even if he was high as a bat. It's painful to lose a loved one especially in this circumstance. There was absolutely no reason for the altercation, except that you insist it was his duty to disarm White.

Originally Posted by Kamms

It's called spit-balling, like several of us did here when this first happened. Like pretty anything today, spit-balling goes off the charts quickly because there's way too many emotional hemophiliacs today.

How did you figure out that Schellenger wasn't trying to disarm White?

[Kamms]

Originally Posted by 1ondoner

Sorry, courts rely on evidence.

BTW, I think White should do time for manslaughter. What I don't understand is what business Schellenger had to engage him. That was pure stupidity, there's no excuse even if he was high as a bat. It's painful to lose a loved one especially in this circumstance. There was absolutely no reason for the altercation, except that you insist it was his duty to disarm White.

Really, courts rely on evidence...

Not sure where the duty to disarm is coming from. There's no duty to disarm someone and now apparently there's no option to do so, risks and all.

So what else would Schellenger be up to trying to take White down? Disable, disarm, beat down? according to the jury it was to kill. White has produced a deadly weapon prior to this attempted take down.

White's self-defense was rooted in his state of mind, not Schellenger's.

Careful who you mess with on the streets, you may get your a*s kicked, maybe not, but you can use the 7'' knife you produced to kill this guy because you were trying to defuse some third-party argument he was involved in and swoop in to calm things down.

[Kamms]

Originally Posted by eliza61nyc

Except that's not what he said. He said the DAs office presented the facts of the case and that they followed the law. He said they respected the jury's decision.
He showed a heck of a lot more class than the Schelllengers.
He did extend his sympathy to the victims family as did Mr. Whites mother.
It's a trail by jury, at the end of the day someone is not going to be satisfied.
Now whether or not prosecution did its job, I won't comment,. I was not in the courtroom

How is it an open question whether the prosecutor did its job or not when it lands a ''not guilty'' verdict? wtf...lol.

Do you know what a prosecutor's job is?

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by Kamms

Really, courts rely on evidence...

Not sure where the duty to disarm is coming from. There's no duty to disarm someone and now apparently there's no option to do so, risks and all.

So what else would Schellenger be up to trying to take White down? Disable, disarm, beat down? according to the jury it was to kill. White has produced a deadly weapon prior to this attempted take down.

White's self-defense was rooted in his state of mind, not Schellenger's.

Careful who you mess with on the streets, you may get your a*s kicked, maybe not, but you can use the 7'' knife you produced to kill this guy because you were trying to defuse some third-party argument he was involved in and swoop in to calm things down.

I don't think I ever imagined I'd agree with you on some matter involving crime and race, but you never know.

The point is that the standard in criminal cases is "beyond a reasonable doubt." The jury obviously had reasonable doubt, and some of the grounds for it surfaced around the time of the attack.

Schellenger had a past record of belligerence when he was drunk or high; that came out in the news reports right after the slaying.

I don't consider "I'm going to knock the black off you" a racist statement; jeez, I've heard black parents use it on their kids when they're upset at them. But in the context, I can see where it might have served as a trigger, especially to someone who was easily triggered.

The prosecution's job is to remove all doubt. The defense merely has to raise some. Apparently, it did.

[Pennsport]

Yeah, 1londener, I usually see your POV, but definitely not this time. That last post was hanging by a thread.

Regardless, there are much more important and impactful matters to the well-being of Philly that we should be focusing on as opposed to this one-off mess.

[eliza61nyc]

Originally Posted by Kamms

The DA's office released a separate statement.

Why wouldn't the DA's office express sympathy to the Schellengers? It was prosecuting the young man that killed their family member. It's the DA's job to get a conviction for this homicide for the family on behalf of the state. The DA and a victim's family pretty much get along, they're supposed to. It's the DA's job to prosecute and get justice for the victim, the familty, the community. You're statement that Krasner expressed sympathy to the victim's family as if that was something unusual is bizarre.

Krasner's not the judge, he's the DA, the top law enforcement official in Philly. Krasner is supposed to be working with and on behalf of the Schellengers. Put yourself in the Schellengers shoes; like you would be fine and dandy. They're ticked off, who wouldn't be, except you it appears. Right.

It's a trial by jury for sure and at the end of the day, someone is not going to be satisfied. Now the dead guy's family has no class? Nice.

I am not saying that I would be "fine and dandy" but you portrayed Krasner as blowing the Schellengers off, he did not. They issued a statement. they did not say what you claim they said. Just as you put words in my "internet" mouth. NO where did I say I or the Schellengers should be "fine and dandy".

[eliza61nyc]

lol, to the wonderful person who sent me a message saying you hope some "N-word" murders my sons on the streets of philadelphia, thank you. 1) As usual cowards hide behind the web when they want to say something offensive and 2) trying to insult unknown people is sort of like trying to **** in a hurricane, splashback usually gets on you and makes you look stupid.

[eliza61nyc]

Originally Posted by Kamms

How is it an open question whether the prosecutor did its job or not when it lands a ''not guilty'' verdict? wtf...lol.

Do you know what a prosecutor's job is?

Actually I do, growing up with a mother who was a civil rights attorney all her life but I'll give you the standard law description

Prosecuting attorneys represent local, state, or federal governments in criminal court cases. In addition to trying cases, they also interview witnesses or victims, evaluate police reports, and perform legal research to plan the prosecution of each case.

This does not mean that the prosecution always win. Do YOU know how the judicial system works? In a nutshell, the prosecution presents its best case. the JURY job is basically to follow the judges instruction, weigh the evidence presented and then determine the verdict.

The jobs were performed, you simply don't like the outcome. @marketstreetEl said, the defense had to raise reasonable doubt. they did.

[NewtownBucks]

Originally Posted by eliza61nyc

lol, to the wonderful person who sent me a message saying you hope some "N-word" murders my sons on the streets of philadelphia, thank you. 1) As usual cowards hide behind the web when they want to say something offensive and 2) trying to insult unknown people is sort of like trying to **** in a hurricane, splashback usually gets on you and makes you look stupid.

I got a comment asking if I was an "N-word lover", I guess for challenging the notion that Schellenger was just doing his civic duty in trying to remove one of "them" from Philly's streets. It's sad but not surprising that such hateful, small people exist in a community like this, but, alas, they do.

As for the verdict, I am very surprised he wasn't convicted. To me, the manslaughter charge as the law is written in PA seemed like a slam dunk (whereas murder 3 would not have been), but I didn't witness the trial in person, so I dunno.