Well I am shocked.:waitasec:
Involuntary manslaughter does not have to have a motive because it isn't an intentional act but Beth just said that the jury instructions will have that the jury can consider lack of motive.
WTH????????????????????:banghead:
I was a little surprised at that as well. I have full confidence, though, that Walgren will take care of that in his closing argument. Of course there was no motive, this isn't intentional. It's involuntary. Involuntary by its definition suggests there is no motive. He can give a few analogies to dissuade the jury from going down that path. I'd be insulted if I were a juror and the defense tried to suggest since there was no motive, he was not liable in any way.