Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Opposing views offered as Matinicus shooting trial begins
This will be an interesting trial.
The situation would not have happened if Young did not trespass or threaten Bunker.
Keep in mind, Young threatened Bunker earlier in the day, and trespassed on Bunker's boat (with a gun).
Shooting Young may not have been the best solution. But we all have the right to bare arms and protect our family and property.
Here's the story...................................................
By Stephen Betts
Rockland — The prosecution and defense attorney painted different perspectives March 8 on the shooting of a lobsterman on Matinicus last summer.
"This case is about the use, or rather the misuse, of a firearm and the misuse of a firearm by the two defendants," District Attorney Geoffrey Rushlau said in his opening statements to jurors March 8 in Knox County Superior Court.
Philip Cohen, the attorney for 68-year-old Edwin Vance Bunker, said, however, that his client felt he had no choice but to have his revolver and to fire it on the Steamboat Wharf last July 20 on Matinicus.
"He had a reasonable belief that he had to shoot to protect his family and protect himself," Cohen said.