Under almost any other circumstance, Eric Weil would have been the Good Guy of the story. Maybe given a hearty handshake. Maybe just a quick word of thanks. But for one utterly ordinary human reaction, he would certainly not be facing a second trial and a sentence of 3½ to 7 years in prison for reckless endangerment. But he blew it.

His legal woes began after he agreed to take in a friend’s son who was struggling with addiction on the condition that no drugs be brought into his house. When Weil’s girlfriend Belinda encountered the man actively engaged in drug use in their guest bedroom, Weil called 911 and Alton police arrived.

As officers approached his house, Weil came down the porch steps and tried to hand over an open square of paper containing a white powder he’d found in the guestroom, but was repeatedly told to drop it in his unpaved driveway, which he did.

Is there a protocol for how to hand over white powder to cops? They don’t know what it is. You don’t know what it is. Is dropping it on the ground the answer? It would seem that closing the “open square of paper” first might make sense, or perhaps putting into a baggie would be a good idea. But when the cops tell the fellow who is trying to turn it over to them, because it’s what a Good Guy would think is the proper course of action, to drop it on the ground, okay then. After all, they’re the cops and they should certainly know.

But after his girlfriend said several times that she was fearful their Yorkshire terrier, or their free ranging chickens would be exposed, he picked it up again.

What else could he do, between the dog, chickens and his girlfriend? But then, catastrophe. Just as the cops didn’t know what it was, neither did Weil. And whatever it was, it wasn’t something he wanted to touch.

As he lifted it off the ground, some powder got on his index finger and he blew it off.

Whereupon the tough-as-nails cop started to cry.

Police charged that officer Jamie Fellows was exposed to “a large cloud” of fentanyl and he complained he felt something drip down the back of his throat, and later of a headache.

Fentanyl. The newest devil drug, with magical properties to wreak havoc on the human soul, not to mention throat, merely by its proximity to anyone wearing blue. Unfortunately for Officer Fellows, medical science failed to back up his trauma.

An emergency medical technician with Alton Fire Rescue testified that Fellows’ breathing was normal when he was examined and that after sharing the officer’s vital signs with a doctor it was determined that Fellows did not need treatment and had “no apparent illness or injury.”

And so the jury, because the case was apparently not dismissed by a judge laughing his butt off at the inadequacy of the grand jury minutes to show probable cause that a crime occurred, convicted.

During closing arguments to a jury in September, the prosecutor said as the state is in the midst of an opioid crisis Weil should have known the substance was dangerous and that he disregarded the risk by blowing it into the air. The jury returned a guilty verdict.

But upon motion of the defense, Judge James D. O’Neill tossed the verdict and granted a new trial. The prosecution, however, chose not to have the case retried immediately, because it wasn’t about to let this heinous blow go down again for lack of evidence to support the verdict.

[Judge O’Neill] granted a prosecutor 60 days to retain an expert who will support the state’s contention that by blowing fentanyl powder into the air an Alton man recklessly endangered a police officer.

Is it possible? Could there be an “expert” who will opine, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that blowing powder, which Weil should have known was fentanyl because we’re in an opioid crisis for crying out loud, endangered a police officer? A wag might suggest there is an expert who will say anything, for the right price. Sometimes, the fee is paid from the good will of police, appreciating his concern for their well-being.

In the meantime, the defense lawyer will move again for dismissal, but judges are often reluctant to toss an indictment when there’s a jury to do the dirty work, take the heat. Especially when the “victim” is a cop, it’s far more acceptable for the jury to return a “not guilty” verdict than for a judge to nix the case. But that didn’t happen here. Whether Judge O’Neill will risk a second shot remains to be seen. After all, if the prosecution has an expert, maybe there will be no blowback on him?

Not to belabor the obvious, but for fans of trial, in general, and jury nullification, in particular, Weil went to trial and put his fate in the hands of a jury. They nullified, alright, his right to not be convicted except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt. After all, his peers know all too well about our “opioid epidemic” and chose to direct their empathy toward the police officer exposed to demon fentanyl rather than the Good Guy who tried to do the right thing.