The article, which I hope quotes the court documents, states that Ward's statement after the incident was that he yelled and swore at the woman, and then he took his gun out of the holster to check the safety as he planned to enter the house.
So to shorten the story, by admission he was was yelling and swearing and had the gun in his hand. That would be enough for me to consider him to have been provocatively threatening to an unarmed older lady.
I believe the jury probably came to correct decision based on what was presented to them.
I don't know how I feel about supporting Ward in jail for three years, I kind of think that taking guns out of his life (for the rest of his life) would be a suitable punishment, so perhaps I have an issue with mandatory sentencing.
Unlike the jury we know of the previous incident, and that previous incident tends to support a view that Ward does not have the best of judgement when it comes to guns.
I agree that previous history of both the people did not play a part in the trial, but his previous history was with guns capable of killing others, and her's isn't (although her's IS bad bad bad enough).
Whatever measuring stick you use his former history has to be seen as more compelling.
|