From Findlaw.com:

 

 

Voluntary manslaughter occurs when a person intentionally kills another, but acted out of passion or anger brought about by some adequate cause and before he or she had a reasonable time to calm down.

 

 

The defense attorney said that the "passion or anger" requirement was not met.

 

I would say fear is, to quote Webster's here, a strong and barely controllable emotion. So in my eyes, there's the passion requirement, which was brought about by the moving car, which, to an officer, is adequate cause to pull the trigger given the minimal time to calm down.

 

The prosecution rests, Your Honor.

Edited November 14, 20169 yr by SnottieDrippen
Grammar

Wouldn't we assume that the 4 who voted for guilty of murder also voted guilty of voluntary manslaughter?

 

I'm not sure if that is the case. I'm thinking they are 2 different acts as defined by the judge?

If true, wouldn't the (to borrow a math term) least common denominator be the manslaughter? I can see where it might be hard for the 8 to go up...but, for the other 4 to not be willing to come down?

 

So is the person at the prosecutor's office saying that the 4 that said he was guilty of murder wouldn't say he was guilty of at least manslaughter? I have a hard time believing that.

 

Wouldn't we assume that the 4 who voted for guilty of murder also voted guilty of voluntary manslaughter?

 

It's possible the person I talked to has it incorrect or worded wrong. It's also possible I interpreted what they said incorrectly.

 

But I did ask the question of "did all 12 find him guilty, they just couldn't agree on the charge?" And the answer I got back was "yes".

 

It's possible as @TAC said that because they do have different definitions that that is why they wouldn't just "come down to manslaughter". It's also possible that because of the different sentences for the different charges the 4 didn't want to come down and feel like they were letting Tensing off with a lesser penalty than they felt he deserved.

 

If I get more information, I will post it. But what I posted so far is all I have.

They will retry him.

They will retry him.

 

So city council is putting pressure on Deters to retry him?

 

Cincinnati City Council wants the county prosecutor to retry former University of Cincinnati police officer Ray Tensing in the death of Sam DuBose.

 

Council Wednesday unanimously passed a resolution asking Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters "to take all steps necessary to pursue a retrial." It was sponsored by Council members Yvette Simpson, who watched the trial in person and online, and Wendell Young.

 

Ray Tensing fatally shot Sam DuBose during a traffic stop in Mount Auburn last July and was charged with murder and voluntary manslaughter. A mistrial was declared Saturday after jurors, who deliberated 25 hours, could not come to a unanimous decision. A peaceful protest through downtown and Over-the-Rhine followed.

 

Deters must decide whether to retry Tensing. A court hearing has been set for Nov. 28. Deters has said three or four jurors voted for a murder conviction and that they also considered the lesser manslaughter charge.

 

The final vote was eight to four in favor of voluntary manslaughter.

 

"With a vote of eight to four I think that a retrial is warranted," Simpson said. "This is an important case for our community."

 

Young added: "It's important this council make its will known. We're paying attention. We need to seek justice whether Mr. Tensing is guilty, or not. It's our way of saying there must be justice, must be a decision."

 

Councilman Chris Seelbach praised the community for a peaceful march after a mistrial was declared because the jury could not come to a unanimous decision.

 

"The hung jury sparked a lot of anger and frustration with the system, which is good, but not perfect," Seelbach said.

 

The peaceful protest, "is an incredible example of how far we've come."

Family wants him to be retried for murder and drop the manslaughter charge.

Family wants him to be retried for murder and drop the manslaughter charge.

 

A 4 to 8 vote for conviction would seem to make this a risky choice for Deters UNLESS he believes 8 people went "not guilty" because of the lesser option.

Surely the family knows he'll NEVER be convicted of murder...

A 4 to 8 vote for conviction would seem to make this a risky choice for Deters UNLESS he believes 8 people went "not guilty" because of the lesser option.

 

I agree and I think emotion is probably getting the best of them. They just want Tensing to pay and feel he was murdered.

 

DuBose family wants another trial, murder charge | KFDM

 

DuBose's siblings said they want a retrial on the murder charge. There was a manslaughter charge for the jury to consider as well.

 

"We want murder to be the charge, and if they are going to drop anything, drop manslaughter, but don't drop murder," sister Cleshawn DuBose said.

 

The family refused to compromise on the charges.

 

"To say let's put a lesser charge to the case, that's saying we can compromise on Sam, and we are not compromising on Sam," DuBose said.

If they can't meet the manslaughter standards what choice do they have but murder.

My info was wrong. According to Deters, 4 voted murder, 4 voted manslaughter, 4 voted not guilty.

 

This is apparently after the first straw poll where all 12 voted murder.

 

Ray Tensing trial update: Jury first voted 12-

My info was wrong. According to Deters, 4 voted murder, 4 voted manslaughter, 4 voted not guilty.

 

This is apparently after the first straw poll where all 12 voted murder.

 

Ray Tensing trial update: Jury first voted 12- for murder in Sam DuBose case, prosecutor says - Story

Confused. You come back in the room, take a straw poll and everyone says guilty on murder. What's there to deliberate at that point? Shouldn't you just convict and call it a day?

Confused. You come back in the room, take a straw poll and everyone says guilty on murder. What's there to deliberate at that point? Shouldn't you just convict and call it a day?

 

Thought the same thing at first. But If I'm sending a man to jail for a long time I think I may want to make sure my emotions did not get carried away and probably should discuss it. Plus I'm sure they had to be sure a few legal procedures were followed that would help define what they were discussing.

How is anyone supposed to get a fair trial in Cincinnati when even the damn city council is weighing in in his guilt. Let Deters do his job and you all do yours.

Confused. You come back in the room, take a straw poll and everyone says guilty on murder. What's there to deliberate at that point? Shouldn't you just convict and call it a day?

That first straw poll could have been conducted before the end of the trial.