In the first article of this series, I provided the precedent–there really is no Maryland law directly bearing on the case–that may determine the outcome. By bringing this case in the first place, the prosecutor is seemingly following in the high-heeled footsteps of Angela Corey who, Ahab-like, pursued her white whale in the George Zimmerman case. Fortunately, rational principles of self-defense were vindicated in that case. It remains to be seen whether that will be the result in the Matthew Pinkerton case.
Keep in mind, gentle readers, that I do not have all of the facts in this case. I’ve searched the Internet for police and legal information, including the charging affidavit, and have had no luck finding it. Unless it is delayed, the trial is supposedly scheduled to begin in February, so presumably more information will become available in that process. What this means is that I can, for the moment, analyze the case based only on the information I have. Suffice it to say that my analysis and views may certainly change based on future revelations.
Army Paratrooper.org does have some statements from Michael Pinkerton (Matthew’s brother who was present at the time of the shooting) and Jessica Pinkerton (Matthew’s wife). Michael said: