A Prime Example of the He Needed Killin' Defense
Bailiff: Court is now in Session. The Honourable Clarence Brown preciding. Now hearing the case of The People vs Louis Brown.
Judge: Mr Brown you are charged with murder in the first degree. How do you plead?
Mr Brown: Not Guilty your honour... on the grounds of He Needed Killin'.
Judge: I'm sorry? Will you repeat that last part?
Mr Brown: Yessir. See judge. This was killin'. But it weren't murder. Like self defense... that's killin'. But it ain't murder. Well... in this case... this feller needed killin'.
Judge: Mr Brown... you shot the defendant in the face in the middle of a live television interview. The whole world saw it. Are you seriously going to claim self defense?
Mr Brown: No your honor. I'm claiming he needed killing. That man killed my daughter with a knife... then in spite of a massive amount of evidence... he got away with it. Now... ten years after another judge and jury... just like y'all I might add... let him walk... he signs a book deal to confess and make millions off of it. Judge. That man needed killing. For killing my daughter. For killing that boy Goldman. For making a mockery of our whole justice system. I killed him. But it weren't murder.
Judge: Sir this is silly.
Mr Brown: No your honour. It ain't. I call it the He needed killin' defense. In your law books its called Jury Nullification. Its what gives The People to set something right when the letter of the law won't.
Obviously none of that will ever happen. Mostly because Louis Brown is just to much of a pussy to avenge his daughter... otherwise he would've done so already.
Ask yourself though... would you put someone away who killed OJ?