Massive Verdict Reached in ‘Kill Shot’ Case — Right Call? By: Larry Z

In a dramatic verdict that drew sharp reactions, a Hampshire County jury found Brian Camp not guilty of manslaughter after the fatal shooting of his girlfriend’s ex-boyfriend, Jonathan Letendre.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to follow and signup for notifications!

The case, aired live on CourtTV, spotlighted self-defense laws, the human element in jury deliberations, and the visceral fear of home invasion.

In December 2022, Letendre broke into Camp’s home in the middle of the night, leading to a confrontation.

Camp testified that he shot Letendre in self-defense, fearing for his life and the safety of his children.

Prosecutors, however, argued that Camp’s second shot, a ‘kill shot’ — fired over eight minutes after the first — was excessive and unnecessary.

The jury deliberated for just over four hours before delivering their unanimous verdict.

“Not guilty,” declared the foreperson.

The courtroom witnessed palpable relief from Camp, who “started breathing again” and looked stunned by the decision, as noted by CourtTV analysts.

CourtTV commentators dissected the case, with strong opinions on both sides. Criminal defense attorney Michael Allen emphasized the emotional weight jurors bring to cases like this, saying:

It’s everybody’s worst fear: someone breaking into your house at night. That visceral fear influenced their decision more than strict legal definitions.

SEE ALSO: SAF Challenges Hawaii’s Gun Ban for Young Adults

Former prosecutor Mary David highlighted the challenges of second-guessing actions taken during traumatic events.

“The trauma of someone trying to enter your home impacts your decision-making,” she explained, suggesting the jury gave Camp the benefit of the doubt.

Prosecutors argued the second shot, delivered to the back of the head, violated self-defense laws. As CourtTV analysts pointed out:

If this were a jury of robots, Camp would’ve been convicted. But human jurors bring emotion, and they clearly saw a father protecting his family.

This divergence between legal theory and practical human fear underlines why self-defense laws continue to spark debate.

While Camp walks free, the case has left legal experts and commentators reexamining the fine line between protecting oneself and crossing into excessive force.

For our community, this case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of knowing your rights and the legal boundaries of self-defense.

As the panel concluded, “This verdict will spark discussions in law schools and living rooms alike.”

What’s your take on the jury’s verdict?

*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE! ***