Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Oh, Florida. Follow

#1 May 16 2012 at 1:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,646 posts
Apparently the "Stand Your Ground" law is only applicable if you actually kill someone...?

Link

I know it's Gawker, but I'm on my iPhone.
#2 May 16 2012 at 2:17 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,826 posts
So she was getting beat up and managed to get out of the house. Rather than getting in her car and driving away or calling the police, she takes out a gun and goes back into the house hoping he's gone?

I'm not exactly sure where in this she was standing her ground. She had managed to extricate herself from the life-threatening situation and then willfully put herself back into it when she had gone and gotten a gun.
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


World of Warcraft
Aggramar Alliance
Allizsah: 92 Human Paladin
#3 May 16 2012 at 2:20 PM Rating: Good
****
6,471 posts
About the trajectory of the bullet: If it was close enough that it puts the "warning shot" thing in doubt, then it makes sense that the prosecution would use that. All of the testing in the practice range doesn't really dispute that at all; shooting in a range has nothing to do with what you do in a real situation, where real tempers are flaring.

Edited, May 16th 2012 4:21pm by Eske
#4 May 16 2012 at 2:22 PM Rating: Good
****
6,471 posts
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
So she was getting beat up and managed to get out of the house. Rather than getting in her car and driving away or calling the police, she takes out a gun and goes back into the house hoping he's gone?

I'm not exactly sure where in this she was standing her ground. She had managed to extricate herself from the life-threatening situation and then willfully put herself back into it when she had gone and gotten a gun.


Quote:
Consider the decision made against Alexander again: the judge ruled that Alexander, who was in her mother's home and the place where she had been a resident for months, somehow had a duty to retreat from her home, in contravention of both the Stand Your Ground statute and the Castle Doctrine concept from which it sprung. Moreover, she should have left from the garage whose inoperable door even the alleged victim, Gray, admitted she could not use. He also initially acknowledged in a deposition that he blocked her only other egress while threatening to have her beaten up, and that he'd beaten her before, by his own admission, four or five times. According to her—and according to him—he said no one else could have her, then allegedly charged at her while threatening to kill her. Nonetheless, the judge concluded that she did not reasonably believe that shooting a gun without actually shooting a person was necessary to prevent great bodily harm to herself. This time, apparently.
#5 May 16 2012 at 2:22 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
12,277 posts
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
So she was getting beat up and managed to get out of the house. Rather than getting in her car and driving away or calling the police, she takes out a gun and goes back into the house hoping he's gone?.


From what I understand from reading it, she fled from the house into an attached garage. At that point she discovered that the garage door opening mechanism was broken, so she got her gun out of her truck (which was in the garage) and carried it with her as she snuck back into the house to see if he husband had left the premises. He did not, after he charged at her while shouting death threats she fired a shot (warning or otherwise) in his direction.
____________________________
Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
Cooking/Fishing 100


"We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
— James D. Nicoll
#6 May 16 2012 at 2:26 PM Rating: Good
***
2,826 posts
Oh ok, I admit I didn't finish reading the entire article.

If Eske and Shaow are correct then I retract my original statement and throw my hat into the ring of utterly confused.

Edited, May 16th 2012 3:29pm by Bigdaddyjug
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


World of Warcraft
Aggramar Alliance
Allizsah: 92 Human Paladin
#7 May 16 2012 at 2:27 PM Rating: Excellent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,246 posts
Shaowstrike the Shady wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
So she was getting beat up and managed to get out of the house. Rather than getting in her car and driving away or calling the police, she takes out a gun and goes back into the house hoping he's gone?.


From what I understand from reading it, she fled from the house into an attached garage. At that point she discovered that the garage door opening mechanism was broken, so she got her gun out of her truck (which was in the garage) and carried it with her as she snuck back into the house to see if he husband had left the premises. He did not, after he charged at her while shouting death threats she fired a shot (warning or otherwise) in his direction.

Then she should have stayed in the garage and shot him if he tried to come in. Stupid girl.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#8 May 16 2012 at 2:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Stand your corner!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#9 May 16 2012 at 2:35 PM Rating: Good
****
6,471 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Stand your corner kitchen!


The alleged was a woman, you forget.
#10 May 16 2012 at 2:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
War against Women 2: Women Fight Back!

War Against Women 3: Woman Who Fights Back Put in Prison
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#11 May 16 2012 at 2:48 PM Rating: Decent
******
49,662 posts
Jophiel wrote:
War against Women 2: Women Fight Back!

War Against Women 3: Woman Who Fights Back Put in Prison Kitchen
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#12 May 16 2012 at 2:54 PM Rating: Excellent
This is just another example in a long history of DV victims being punished for self defense, even if it wasn't in the heat of the moment. In most cases, I will agree that killing somebody while they're asleep, after they beat you up, isn't self defense. In DV situations though, it should be. Especially if the abuser has put you in the hospital before. It's incredibly frustrating for me to see someone who has been a DV victim, do the only thing he or she knows to do, and kills the perp in a moment where they actually have the opportunity without the risk of being killed themselves (in an effort to avoid further violence against themselves) and then be hit with murder or manslaughter. No, that's self defense. Maybe not in a traditional sense, but it should still count as self defense in these particular situations.
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 100 Priest
Thelesis, 91 Mage
Necralita, 90 DK
Digits, 87 Shaman
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Shrika, 72 Warlock
Jaquelle, 54 Paladin
Grakine, 32 Hunter
The MMO-Zam's FB group. Please message me first so I know who you are.
#13 May 16 2012 at 2:55 PM Rating: Good
****
6,471 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
War against Women 2: Women Fight Back!

War Against Women 3: Woman Who Fights Back Put in Prison Kitchen


Mine was better.

You can tell, because I got rated down for it. Smiley: laugh
#14 May 16 2012 at 3:11 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,865 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
So she was getting beat up and managed to get out of the house. Rather than getting in her car and driving away or calling the police, she takes out a gun and goes back into the house hoping he's gone?

I'm not exactly sure where in this she was standing her ground. She had managed to extricate herself from the life-threatening situation and then willfully put herself back into it when she had gone and gotten a gun.


Quote:
Consider the decision made against Alexander again: the judge ruled that Alexander, who was in her mother's home and the place where she had been a resident for months, somehow had a duty to retreat from her home, in contravention of both the Stand Your Ground statute and the Castle Doctrine concept from which it sprung. Moreover, she should have left from the garage whose inoperable door even the alleged victim, Gray, admitted she could not use. He also initially acknowledged in a deposition that he blocked her only other egress while threatening to have her beaten up, and that he'd beaten her before, by his own admission, four or five times. According to her—and according to him—he said no one else could have her, then allegedly charged at her while threatening to kill her. Nonetheless, the judge concluded that she did not reasonably believe that shooting a gun without actually shooting a person was necessary to prevent great bodily harm to herself. This time, apparently.


I don't think those facts are as factual as you think. While the story being told here (great journalism going on here btw), is muddled as ****, it looks as though that wasn't here house, but his. There are several mentions of her going to his house to get some paperwork signed, when the incident occurred. And the statement from the DA suggests that she went to his house despite a court order to stay away from him (again, the "facts" being represented on the linked site(s) are absolutely horrible). If that is the case, then the castle defense does not stand. She's not protecting her property and standing her ground against someone else, she *is* the someone else.


Just as I mentioned in the Zimmerman case, if one initiates a conflict (which she does by coming out of the garage and confronting her husband with a loaded weapon), she's required to either make clear a desire to leave the conflict and is then pursued *or* be unable to do so in order to regain the right to use lethal force in self defense. Unlike Zimmerman, she was not pinned to the ground when she fired. Unlike Zimmerman, she went to get a gun and then returned to an earlier conflict that had ended. To make a comparison between those two would require that Martin jump Zimmerman, then leave him, then Zimmerman goes to his car, gets his gun and comes back and shoots Martin. Um... Which is not remotely what happened.

If she'd had her gun on her when she was attacked and used it then, she'd be in the right. But self defense doesn't allow you to get a gun *after* someone has hurt you and then go to where they are and shoot them. That's not self defense. That's retaliation.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#15 May 16 2012 at 4:00 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,646 posts
Quote:
If she'd had her gun on her when she was attacked and used it then, she'd be in the right.


Which is what happened when she came in from the garage where she was trapped because the door didn't work.

Also, if her truck was in the garage, then I would assume it was her house and not his.
#16 May 16 2012 at 4:02 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,849 posts
If she really was stuck in the garage, she didn't really escape and come back. She reached a dead end and had to turn around.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#17 May 16 2012 at 4:05 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,662 posts
She should have vibrated her molecules at such a speed that she could have escaped by phasing through the walls, apparently.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#18 May 16 2012 at 5:26 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,865 posts
Belkira wrote:
Quote:
If she'd had her gun on her when she was attacked and used it then, she'd be in the right.


Which is what happened when she came in from the garage where she was trapped because the door didn't work.

Also, if her truck was in the garage, then I would assume it was her house and not his.


Also suggests that the garage door worked. At the risk of linking a less sensationalist source:

Quote:
According to a sworn deposition taken in November 2010, Gray, 36, said that on August 1, 2010, he and Alexander began fighting after he found text messages to Alexander's first husband on her phone. The two were already estranged - according to her father, Alexander had been living at her mother's since the birth of the couple's daughter nine days earlier, and Gray, a long-haul trucker, said he spent the night before in his tractor-trailer. Gray began calling her names, saying "If I can't have you, nobody going to have you," and blocking her from exiting the bathroom.


It's unclear who was in the home first and who was "visiting", but there are several parts of the whole "she had no choice but to come back into the living room with her gun" that are iffy. Given that I would assume such matters were discussed far more fully in the courtroom than we have here, and the jury took only 15 minutes to decide she was guilty, they clearly didn't buy that argument either.


I think that some people are trying to push a square peg through a round hole with this one. The two cases have *nothing* to do with each other except that a gun was fired and a black person was involved. More than a stretch IMO.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#19 May 16 2012 at 5:47 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Also suggests that the garage door worked.

You mean it suggests the door worked at the time the truck was put in there. Whenever and however long ago that was.

I think you've read too many Hardy Boys books.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#20 May 16 2012 at 5:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,222 posts
She was pregnant in 2010. Article doesn't mention the little nipper, but if there was a kid still in the house I'd go back in, too.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#21 May 16 2012 at 6:46 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
She should have vibrated her molecules at such a speed that she could have escaped by phasing through the walls, apparently.

That's the way they do it on Fringe.
#22 May 16 2012 at 7:02 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,865 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Also suggests that the garage door worked.

You mean it suggests the door worked at the time the truck was put in there. Whenever and however long ago that was.


Presumably earlier that day, since the article says she'd been staying at her mom's since the birth of their child 9 days earlier. There are lots of details that we're missing, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the jury had a **** of a lot more accurate information than we do, and it took them 15 minutes to find her guilty.

I'm going to also assume that the judge who considered the motion to dismiss on the basis of stand your ground *also* had much more (and more accurate) facts than we do. It just seems somewhat absurd to leap to an assumption that the legal system got it wrong based on what you have to admit are some pretty incredibly vague, inconsistent, and biased accounts of events. That doesn't mean that there wasn't a grave miscarriage of justice that happened here, but nothing I've seen so far is sufficiently compelling to make that case.

Quote:
I think you've read too many Hardy Boys books.


If that was the case, I'd be arguing that she should have looked for some kind of secret passage behind the workbench or something. Smiley: tongue
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#23 May 16 2012 at 7:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Also suggests that the garage door worked.
You mean it suggests the door worked at the time the truck was put in there. Whenever and however long ago that was.
Presumably earlier that day

Possible. Funny thing about garage doors, they tend to break when they're actually being used. Another fun fact: about 50% of the time when you're using one, you're putting a vehicle into the garage.

Both parties said that it didn't work so I'm not sure why you think you've sleuthed something unusual here.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#24 May 16 2012 at 10:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Since when do you just trust the judges decision Gbaji? this isn't like you at all.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#25 May 16 2012 at 11:48 PM Rating: Good
Coincidentally, the prosecutor in this case is the same one prosecuting Zimmerman. Also, its my understanding that a plea deal was offered, 3 years, but the defendant opted to go to trial. She lost said trial & got sentenced under Florida's mandatory "20 years if you use a gun in a crime" law.

If you want to rage, rage at mandatory minimum sentences, not the judge.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#26 May 17 2012 at 12:11 AM Rating: Decent
******
21,720 posts
gbaji wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Quote:
If she'd had her gun on her when she was attacked and used it then, she'd be in the right.


Which is what happened when she came in from the garage where she was trapped because the door didn't work.

Also, if her truck was in the garage, then I would assume it was her house and not his.


Also suggests that the garage door worked. At the risk of linking a less sensationalist source:

Quote:
According to a sworn deposition taken in November 2010, Gray, 36, said that on August 1, 2010, he and Alexander began fighting after he found text messages to Alexander's first husband on her phone. The two were already estranged - according to her father, Alexander had been living at her mother's since the birth of the couple's daughter nine days earlier, and Gray, a long-haul trucker, said he spent the night before in his tractor-trailer. Gray began calling her names, saying "If I can't have you, nobody going to have you," and blocking her from exiting the bathroom.


It's unclear who was in the home first and who was "visiting", but there are several parts of the whole "she had no choice but to come back into the living room with her gun" that are iffy. Given that I would assume such matters were discussed far more fully in the courtroom than we have here, and the jury took only 15 minutes to decide she was guilty, they clearly didn't buy that argument either.


I think that some people are trying to push a square peg through a round hole with this one. The two cases have *nothing* to do with each other except that a gun was fired and a black person was involved. More than a stretch IMO.



Rambling stupidity aside here, there is a valid comparison between this case and Zimmerman's. In both cases, the defendant entered into a situation that could very reasonably be perceived ahead of time to be dangerous and/or life threatening. Both people had an opportunity to escape and both people took an alternate path. If this woman is to be convicted for her actions, so should Zimmerman. Lest you argue that Zimmerman eventually became the victim of an attack, I'll remind you that according to the events in question and the original statement from her (ex?) husband, he charged at her, thus putting her in the same life threatening situation that Travon supposedly inflicted upon Zimmerman.

But nevermind the facts of the case. Leave it to Gbaji to defend a psuedo-white individual, arguing the whole while about us not having all the facts, while immediately taking the offensive in a separate case involving a black "aggressor".
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 58 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (58)