Jusme wrote:There is way too much missing information to make an informed opinion, in my opinion. A torn shirt is not direct, or conclusive evidence of an attack. The solicitor may have grabbed it after being shot as an involuntary reaction. All we have to go on are the statements of a woman, who did not see the interaction, or hear anything besides the gun shots and the homeowners statements.
I'm sure, as evidence is gathered, and the testimony is presented in court, the whole story, or at least much more of it, will be revealed.
As far as evidence, isn't the burden on the prosecution to show that the shooter was in the wrong. I would think they would need to show conclusive evidence that there was not an attack by the solicitor.
I know that I have answered the door with a gun in hand before when I get an unexpected visitor and am not wearing a holster for some reason. The gun is usually not visible to whoever is at my door, though. I could see a situation where the homeowner was irritated that someone was bothering them and also trespassing, so he had some choice words for a solicitor who might have his own anger issues, followed by some type of threat or actual physical contact, and then bad things happening from there. Like you say, hopefully we will get more evidence of what actually happened.