Should the DA prosecute a husband that killed his estranged wife in 'self-defense'?

Question

If a husband kills his estranged wife in self-defense should the local DA at least attempt to charge? It's been 3 yrs (Okla)
-No witnesses (well two but one is dead)
-Rual residence
-Husband has documented history of domestic violence against four ex-wives all obtained protective orders against him at one time or another
-Husband claims estranged wife shot at him with a .22 pistol
-Husband has wound in palm of left hand and .22 bullet holes in the walls of the house to prove it
-Estranged wife dead on floor from single gunshot wound to the chest (.44 Mag Rifle)
-.22 pistol resting in the palm of dead woman's hand was suspictious to investigator when asked about it husband admitted that after shooting her (in self-defense) he picked up the pistol and held it to his head contemplating suicide. Changed his mind but placed the weapon into the palm of her hand rather then putting it back where it fell
-Estranged wifes car had damage from previouse incidents of rage from husband

http://news-star.com/stories/092504/New_26.shtml

Domestic disturbance turns deadly
By Kimberly D. Morava
SNS Staff Writer

A 23-year-old woman was killed and her husband was injured Thursday night when they apparently shot each other during a domestic disturbance at 9611 Coker Road.

Dead at the scene was Stephanie Rae (Payne) Mosier, said Pottawatomie County Sheriff Kurt Shirey. She suffered a single gunshot wound to the chest from a .44 Mag rifle.

Her husband, 32-year-old Todd Dwain Mosier, was treated for a .22 caliber gunshot wound to the palm of his left hand and released.

(click on link to continue article)

Answer 1

There seems to be enough evidence to prosecute.
Unlike rape, that has like a 7 years in which to accuse and trial someone, there is no expiration on when a murder can be trialed.

To me, this sounds right out of a book. The guy killed his wife with the 44. Took the 22 pistol, shot a couple hole in the wall, then grazed his own hand with it. Then he put the 22 in his wife's hand to make it look like she did it.

Yes, it's all circumstantial, but it seems to be enough to take it to a grand jury.

Answer 2

The history of domestic violence has to be ignored at the trial and can only be bought up for sentencing so it isn't evidence (it might just get him a longer or different sentence if he is found guilty) so even though it's pretty clear that he probably didn't shoot her in self-defence (she might have shot at him in self-defence but it seems unlikely) it's going to be pretty hard to get a murder charge beyond reasonable doubt.

OTOH if he has admitted to shooting her (which he seems to have done) then all the prosecution would need to do is dispute that it was self-defence (although even proving that he shot first is going to be hard). The fact that she was apparently armed with a gun means that lethal force would be reasonable for self defence so claiming excessive force wouldn't work, you'd just have to show that he was the one who shot first. The wound in the left hand might impair his operation of a rifle (if it weren't self-inflicted) although a small carbine should be possible to operate with one hand.

I'd also be looking into why he was there and why he had a rifle on him.

Answer 3

If the DA wants to prosecute - he will wait until the case is strong enough to win. They only get one bite at the apple so you better make sure you can win it - cause if you lose you can't try him again (even if new compelling evidence is discovered).

There is no statute of limitations on murder.

Answer 4

Tough job .... it's a he said, she can't say ..... in the absence of definitive evidence the "DA" will wait ... after all there is limitation for prosecution on Murder .........

Why jump the gun and loose what evidence he already has ...... waiting can only bring more things to light.