Coroner's Jury - Accidental Death???

Last week I attended a Coroner's Inquest following the beanbag shooting death of a Wonder Lake man last September. I heard all the evidence presented by the lieutenant from the Sheriff's Department and by one resident of the household, and I heard the verdict delivered by the jury after 15 minutes of deliberation.

According to information published by the Office of the Coroner, a jury is instructed to return one of five verdicts: Accidental Death, Suicide, Homicide, Natural Death, or Undetermined. "Accidental Death" is defined for the jurors as "A death caused by an unexpected, unintended, and unforeseeable cause. " Homicide" is defined as "an act purposely, knowingly, recklessly or negligently performed that causes the death of another human being."

Considering the facts presented, the jurors should have returned a verdict of Homicide - justifiable as a shooting to prevent serious harm or death of the deputy who had to shoot or of another deputy. The shooting was not unexpected; it was not unintended, and it was not unforeseen.

The shooting was on and with purpose, and it was done knowingly. The shooting was not recklessly or negligently performed. Blame is not an issue here. According to statements written in the departmental reports of the deputies and to evidence presented at the Inquest, the deputy who shot was protecting himself and another deputy.

Perhaps it is fortunate that other information published by the Office of the Coroner reads that a Coroner's Inquest "is simply an inquiry into the manner and cause of an individual's death."

If a Coroner's Jury does not return correct verdicts, is there any reason to hold Inquests in the first place?