I don't know the story very well unfortunately, but it sounds like if they had gone with manslaughter instead of second degree murder then they would have gotten the verdict, but because they kept going for second-degree it ended up being he was deemed not guilty of that? Is that accurate or am I way off base?
Second Degree Murder seemed pretty likely to me given that Stanley shot multiple times at Colten while claiming it was accidental, and the RCMP Firearms expert says he doesn’t believe the gun went off accidentally:
Weapon that killed Colten Boushie does not appear to have malfunctioned, court hears
Colten Boushie was shot in the back of the head. What many are saying is reminiscent of an ‘execution style’ murder.
How is that not 2nd degree murder? I could only accept that it should have been manslaughter, if it was clear that it was an accident, and I’m not seeing much evidence that this was the case.
Ms. Wuttunee said she asked Ms. Stanley why they’d killed Colten. Ms. Stanley replied by saying “something about property,” the ITO states. Ms. Wuttunee later told Colten’s relatives the phrase was: “That’s what you get for trespassing on private property.”
It is illegal to kill someone over property in Canada as well. There is no excuse.