|
The location of the shots, in the back, is not germaine to most of the legal stuff I have seen. By germaine, I mean that the laws don't specifically say you can't shoot someone in the back. Either you had the right to use lethal force, or not. If you did have the right to use it, then shot placement on target does not matter.
The same goes for the fact the guy was on the ground. His position and being shot in the back will be used to create the atmosphere that the man was no longer a threat and it will be used to make the female victim look bad, but those 'facts' are not legal issues per se.
Something else to consider and this may be somewhat contrary to what Mike Irwin was saying. The guy may have been dead on the ground when she shot him again in the back. This will be something the coroner may be able to determine. If so, the lethal force issue on a dead body becomes somewhat moot because her first shot to the head may be ruled as being self defense. If the head shot killed him, for the follow-up shots she is guilty, potentially, of lesser crimes such as mutilating a corpse or reckless discharge of a firearm.
|