Your speculations on what Wilson MIGHT have done, or COULD have done, have no bearing.
Correct.
We don't condemn and imprison people on the basis of what they might have been able to do.
That is correct, we don't condemn or imprison people on the basis of what they
might have been able to do. However, we do
kill on the basis of what they
might have been able to do. Wilson quite literally killed this teen on the basis of what the teen
might have been able to do.
They are judged on the basis of what they actually did do and whether the law justified it.
Exactly my point. Wilson is the law, he judged the teen, convicted him, and executed him on spot.
In this case, the law justified what Wilson did.
Incorrect. The law decided there was not enough evidence to support an indictment. That is not the same as justifying it.