Manslaughter Defendant's Attorney to the Jury:
"These type of beatings have been allowed in the past because nobody "was hurt", and "good union men" never spoke up, and that is why the perp killed the guy. The guy just wanted to have a "little scuffle", he didn't know the man would die of a heart attack. You know, it was just a little crack in the mouth to get a point across. The perp really thinks the guy deserved what he had coming. But he honestly did not mean for the guy to die. The defendant should be exonerated based on the passed actions and the lack of accountability by union officers and members. It is really because "good union men" of the past allowed such scuffles, not the defendants actions that should judged."
Then the widow of the deceased, after hearing this information, would file a "Civil Action" against the "good union officers" and their union, this would not only drain the union bank funds, but if that is not enough money to cover the damages, each union member will have his check garnished to fund the jurys finding against the "good union men", until ALL losses have been made whole.
Yeah, your probably right Raptor, just blow it off. Nobody was hurt.