Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Oh, Florida. Follow

#1 May 16 2012 at 1:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 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
***
2,810 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
****
6,470 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
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#4 May 16 2012 at 2:22 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 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.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#5 May 16 2012 at 2:22 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
11,338 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
***
2,810 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
*****
10,245 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
****
6,470 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Stand your corner kitchen!


The alleged was a woman, you forget.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#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
******
44,282 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, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
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
****
6,470 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
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#14 May 16 2012 at 3:11 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,875 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
******
30,643 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!
*****
15,072 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
******
44,282 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
******
31,875 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
******
28,306 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
*****
16,289 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
******
31,875 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
******
21,718 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.


#27 May 17 2012 at 5:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Omegavegeta wrote:
If you want to rage, rage at mandatory minimum sentences, not the judge.

I don't see where the two are mutually exclusive. Minimum sentences still require judges.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#28 May 17 2012 at 6:21 AM Rating: Excellent
I wrote:
If you want to rage, rage at mandatory minimum sentences, not the judge.

Joph wrote:
I don't see where the two are mutually exclusive. Minimum sentences still require judges.


Judges don't get to reduce sentences when the law requires a mandatory minimum. While the judge, given the evidence (she did return to the scene to face him with a gun) did refuse to allow her to use the stand your ground law, it was a jury trial.

She says it was self defense, both the judge & jury disagreed given the evidence. The judge may have gone lenient with the sentencing, but couldn't due to the mandatory minimum.

Corey being able to get this conviction does give me some hope that she's going to go after Zimmerman hard, though.

Edited, May 17th 2012 8:23am by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"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


#29 May 17 2012 at 6:38 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Omegavegeta wrote:
Judges don't get to reduce sentences when the law requires a mandatory minimum.

I understand that. Regardless, there's still places for people to be critical of the judge and of the system in general. It's not as though it's some zero-sum equation where thinking the judge made errors takes blame away from the sentencing guidelines.

I say this mainly in general. I don't have any particularly strong feelings about this case in specific.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#30 May 17 2012 at 6:46 AM Rating: Good
******
44,282 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Coincidentally, the prosecutor in this case is the same one prosecuting Zimmerman.
Good advertising, I suppose.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#31 May 17 2012 at 4:36 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,875 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
gbaji wrote:
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.


Saying it over and over doesn't make it so. It really doesn't.

Quote:
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.


You're sugar coating the differences though, aren't you? Zimmerman had no idea who Martin was, or that Martin would react violently to him. Alexander did know Gray, and did know that he would likely react violently towards her.

Quote:
Both people had an opportunity to escape and both people took an alternate path.


You're muddling up the sequence though. The key question is what actions were taken *after* a violent encounter occurred. Zimmerman was not able to escape after Martin jumped him (as far as we know anyway). Alexander could have simply walked past the living room and out the front door, but choose to re-engage into a conflict, but this time with a loaded weapon.

As I stated earlier, to make these similar would require that Martin jumped Zimmerman and then let him go. Zimmerman then goes to his truck, gets his gun, and then comes back to confront Martin. Under those circumstances, Zimmerman also could not use any sort of self defense argument, stand your ground or otherwise.

Quote:
If this woman is to be convicted for her actions, so should Zimmerman.


You're still missing an absolutely key difference, which is what makes one legitimate self defense and the other not.

Quote:
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.


Except that she escaped him, then got a gun and came back and confronted him again. How the **** do you not see this massive difference? The question of self defense occurs in the action of confrontation. It's not determined based on events which lead up to that. You're trying to equate Zimmerman following Martin through the complex with Alexander coming back out of the garage with her gun. But those are *not* identical or even very similar situations. In one, the armed person had no reason to assume that the person he was following would assault him, in the other, she not only did, but by most accounts of events actually initiated the assault.

Quote:
But nevermind the facts of the case.


There's some serious irony, right there.


Quote:
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".



I think that if you stop looking at the skin colors of the people involved, and instead look at the actions and events, you'd see this more clearly. My assessment has nothing to do with skin color. Most of those insisting these cases are the same and that there's some sort of racial angle going on are themselves the ones judging based on skin color and not facts. Which is also amazingly ironic.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#32 May 17 2012 at 4:52 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
gbaji, although there are many untrue statements in your last post, let me only focus on the following:

Running into a garage with no exit is not an escape.

I also want to add that Zimmerman called the police on a suspicious character then decided to pursue and confront said suspicious character with a gun. This isn't that different from what Alexander did. And she managed not to KILL anyone.
#33 May 17 2012 at 4:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Not to mention that she's a survivor of domestic violence, perpetrated by the guy she shot the gun AT. I think that makes her more of a victim than Zimmerman. Way more.
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
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.
#34 May 17 2012 at 5:22 PM Rating: Excellent
******
44,282 posts
gbaji wrote:
Saying it over and over doesn't make it so. It really doesn't.
Does this mean you'll stop?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#35 May 17 2012 at 5:31 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,875 posts
Belkira wrote:
gbaji, although there are many untrue statements in your last post, let me only focus on the following:

Running into a garage with no exit is not an escape.


You're doing the same thing BD was doing though. You're mixing up moving around with conflict. Those are two different things. Whether she is able to leave the house directly from the garage isn't the point from a self defense point of view. Whether she was continuing to be physically assaulted *is*. At the moment she was in the garage and he wasn't, she ceased to be in "imminent threat of loss of life or grave bodily harm". Period. From the laws perspective, that's what matters here.

Whatever happened as she attempted to leave the house is a second confrontation, and must be considered separately. You're muddling multiple things. ****, it's the same thing people did/do with the Zimmerman case. They want to treat the following Martin through the complex and shooting him as though it's one event. But it's not. One event is following Martin. Another event is encountering Martin. Yet another event is choosing to shoot Martin. Each of those is separate. Each of those has its own potentials and legal ramifications. You have to look at just the confrontation that is occurring at the moment a self defense claim is being made, not one that happened previously.

That is why Zimmerman choosing to follow Martin has no bearing on the legality of his firing his weapon later in self defense. It's also why the altercation between Gray and Alexander which lead to her going into the garage has no legal bearing on her firing her weapon later either. What matters is what she intended to do when she got her gun out of her car, and what she did after that point. Did she deliberately create a conflict which she could have avoided (at that point)? Or was she unable to do so?

Now, when asking that question, if there was no way out of the house except through Gray, you might have a point. However, this is where accounts get really sketchy, vague, and inconsistent. Obviously, I don't have a map of the house in front of me. I'm going to guess that the layout of said house was shown to the jury though. I'm going to guess that the key question was whether the location she was standing and the direction she fired was something she had no choice but to do, or whether she choose to do it. And based on the jury's result, it looks like they didn't buy her story.

By all means though, show me a map of the house showing that there was no other door from the garage (most have the garage door and a side door, but I have no clue in this case).. Show me that there was no route from the door from the garage into the house that would have allowed her to leave without confronting Gray. Then show me that the accounts that she came out of the garage, walked into the living room, said something like "I've got something for you!" and fired at him were false. There are lots of different accounts of this case floating around. I've read at least three completely inconsistent accounts just in the 3 or 4 web pages I've checked. I can't possibly know what actually happened.

But a jury decided that her actions did not constitute self defense, and a judge decided that her actions did not meet the requirements for stand your ground. And in this case, I simply do not have enough facts to show differently. Nothing I've read so far, and nothing anyone has posted about this is sufficient.

Quote:
I also want to add that Zimmerman called the police on a suspicious character then decided to pursue and confront said suspicious character with a gun.


Irrelevant. It's a concealed weapon. He's not allowed to brandish it or even reveal to anyone on the street that he has it on him. From a legal standpoint, the fact that he's armed has no meaning. His action is no more or less legal than if he had not been carrying it. It's not like he was waving it around chasing Martin through the complex yelling "I'm gonna get you sucka!". Martin (kinda obviously) had absolutely no clue Zimmerman was armed. So the fact of the weapons presence has zero legal weight with regard to Zimmerman's choice to follow Martin.

And the fact is that he had every freaking legal right to do so. Period. He broke no laws doing so. He has just as much right to pursue Martin as Martin had to walk through the complex. Those actions are irrelevant. What matters is what happened from the moment a physical confrontation occurred to the moment the shot was fired. Period.


Quote:
This isn't that different from what Alexander did.


It's radically different from what Alexander did. If you can't see that, then I just can't help you here. It's a night and day difference. Again, the equivalent action would have been Zimmerman going to his car *after* being attacked by Martin, getting his gun, and then going over, weapon out, and confronting Martin. Because that's exactly what she did.

Quote:
And she managed not to KILL anyone.


Which is also irrelevant when considering whether the weapon was fired in self defense or not. Guess what? If Zimmerman's shooting is ruled to not be self defense then he'll also get hit with the same stiff sentencing. Um... Which kinda brings up another key difference. She has actually already been through a jury trial. Two, I believe. He has not yet. You have no idea whether his case will come out differently, but you're willing to speculate that it might, and that this would be some kind of travesty of justice.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#36 May 17 2012 at 5:41 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,875 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
Not to mention that she's a survivor of domestic violence, perpetrated by the guy she shot the gun AT.


There's lots of evidence that the domestic violence between them went both ways. But in any case, she didn't just shoot the gun at him. She shot it at two children in the room as well. By her own statement, she closed her eyes, turned away and fired blindly in the direction of Gray, while two minors were standing near him.

BTW, that's part of why the prosecution was so forceful on this case. It wasn't just her shooting at him, but her endangering two children who were in the room at the time.

Quote:
I think that makes her more of a victim than Zimmerman. Way more.


We can argue her victimhood in other social aspects, but the law has to look at this one case and this one event and this one sequence of events. Unfortunately, while we can sit here and speculate about all the abuse she's suffered over the years (months actually), from Gray, that doesn't justify what she did legally. ****, we can make an even stronger case that she could or should have gotten away from this guy well before this happened.

Obviously, domestic violence is a bit more complex, and these two seemed to have an absolutely screwed up relationship. One of the bits you'll pick up (if you read a bit more sources) is that much of the facts that people repeat when arguing that her conviction was unfair were things Gray said at the time, but later recanted. He said that he lied for her and told police that she really didn't shoot at him because he didn't want her to get in legal trouble. So in his case, he said one thing when calling the cops, a different thing when giving a statement, and yet another thing when being interviewed during the lead up to trial.

The job of the jury is to look at all those differing accounts and determine what really happened. It's somewhat silly for us, after the fact, to read one cherry picked set of accounts and draw a conclusion based on that. I think the big issue here was the child endangerment aspect. While the two adults are having their spats, and it's escalating, it's the children who are being harmed. And that's why they basically threw the book at her. It would be nice to lock him away as well, I think. But the law only allows us to charge people for crimes we can prove. We can't just lock them up for being incredibly crappy parents (and people).

Edited, May 17th 2012 4:46pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#37 May 17 2012 at 7:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Saying it over and over doesn't make it so. It really doesn't.
Does this mean you'll stop?

How'd that work out for ya?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#38 May 17 2012 at 7:13 PM Rating: Excellent
******
44,282 posts
Knowing the answer doesn't mean I can't use the question to +1.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#39 May 18 2012 at 7:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Sniping Sweetpea
*****
18,461 posts
Nadenu wrote:
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 X-Men.

Shadowcat 4evah!
____________________________
That's the kind of dude
I was lookin' for
And yes you'll get slapped
if you're lookin', ho

#40 May 18 2012 at 7:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Is that Shadowcat on laundry day? I don't know if the velour fleece-style stop with tights and external panties is a great look for her. The "strip of fabric" belt isn't helping.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#41 May 18 2012 at 7:53 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
She also has the squarest ******* of all time.
#42 May 18 2012 at 8:01 AM Rating: Good
******
44,282 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Is that Shadowcat on laundry day?
You shoulda seen her the day she fell through the laundry hamper and Gambit forgot his secret stash of acid in one of his pockets.
Screenshot
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#43 May 18 2012 at 8:20 AM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
12,003 posts
gbaji wrote:
Zimmerman was not able to escape after Martin jumped him (as far as we know anyway).


Is the "as far as we know anyway" to Zimmerman not being able to escape, or to Martin jumping him? The way you wrote it sounds like the former, but as far as I've heard it applies equally to the latter. While people saw Martin on top of Zimmerman right before he was shot, nothing I've read has said there were witnesses to who started the fight, much less seeing Martin "jump him." That's Zimmerman's account alone, right?
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#44 May 18 2012 at 8:30 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,482 posts

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.


They, as you, know that blacks are prone to lying when you catch them stealing watermelons killing their husbands. You have to admit, though, that given the black person standard of deliberating 60 seconds for each year of jail time, this verdict was a little fast.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#45 May 18 2012 at 8:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
29,482 posts

That's Zimmerman's account alone, right?


I hear Martin refuses to answers questions about that night. As they say about Freud "he's rather slow to update his work in light of new evidence".
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#46 May 18 2012 at 8:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Sniping Sweetpea
*****
18,461 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Is that Shadowcat on laundry day? I don't know if the velour fleece-style stop with tights and external panties is a great look for her. The "strip of fabric" belt isn't helping.

It's the Excalibur costume, from my favorite classic version of her. I hate the original X-Men costume.
____________________________
That's the kind of dude
I was lookin' for
And yes you'll get slapped
if you're lookin', ho

#47 May 18 2012 at 8:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Everyone should hate those costumes.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#48 May 18 2012 at 6:35 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,875 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Zimmerman was not able to escape after Martin jumped him (as far as we know anyway).


Is the "as far as we know anyway" to Zimmerman not being able to escape, or to Martin jumping him?


Either/Both? Read that as "if this account of events is true, then...". Although, to be fair, whether Martin jumped him or not may not matter from a legal standpoint. As I've pointed out repeatedly in other threads on the subject, Zimmerman being pinned to the ground by Martin and being unable to escape and with no sign that anyone was coming to help him any time soon is sufficient for a self defense claim regardless of who started the fight.

Quote:
The way you wrote it sounds like the former, but as far as I've heard it applies equally to the latter. While people saw Martin on top of Zimmerman right before he was shot, nothing I've read has said there were witnesses to who started the fight, much less seeing Martin "jump him." That's Zimmerman's account alone, right?


Yes. That is Zimmerman's account. But as I just said, while it may matter a lot to the outrage crowd, from a legal perspective, it doesn't matter (much) who started the fight. If they were both bobbing and weaving and trading blows, and Zimmerman pulled out a gun and fired, he'd be unable to claim self defense (both are participating in a fight and either could leave if they choose). But if one participant is attempting to leave (or otherwise makes clear he's done) and the other is not letting him and even continues to pursue the fight the first guy *always* has right of self defense under Florida law.


Who started the fight matters only in that it increases the burden required for a valid self defense claim. Zimmerman could not make that claim if he had a reasonable avenue of escape, and/or never attempted to do so in the first place. But (again as far as we know, and the witness accounts do seem to support this) he *did* attempt to escape, *and* called for help for a fair amount of time, and was unable to get away and no one came to help him. At some point, when someone is beating your head into the pavement, you get to use a weapon in self defense no matter how the fight started. And let's not forget that we're speculating as to who started it anyway. In the absence of proof either way, we should just look at the conditions just prior to the shot being fired. And those conditions clearly meet the standard needed for self defense.


In the case of Alexander, the jury apparently did not buy that she was unable to escape or even that she attempted to do so. I wasn't in the court room. I haven't seen the evidence they saw. But neither have you. We can sit here and speculate that there really was no way for her to exit the garage without going back into the house, and that there really was no way for her to get through the house without entering the same room as Gray, and that he really did threaten her and move towards her, and that she really could not have gotten away from him, and that she really did have no choice but to fire her weapon at/near him to keep him at bay. It's possible. I haven't seen maps of the house layout. I haven't heard all the full facts. Again though, neither have you. So while we can speculate about it, we should really place a bit (a lot!) more weight on the jury who *did* have the full facts available to them and *did* have a much clearer idea of the layout of the house.


They didn't believe that she was in a position which required her to fire that weapon in self defense. Other than a desire to believe that an injustice has occurred here, do you have any real reason to dispute that conclusion?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#49 May 18 2012 at 6:36 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,875 posts
Atomicflea wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Is that Shadowcat on laundry day? I don't know if the velour fleece-style stop with tights and external panties is a great look for her. The "strip of fabric" belt isn't helping.

It's the Excalibur costume, from my favorite classic version of her. I hate the original X-Men costume.


Welcome to the X-men Kitty Pryde. Hope you survive the experience.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#50 May 18 2012 at 9:27 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
5,662 posts
I thought this was a necro post at first. I wonder how many more "Oh, Florida" threads the future will bring.
____________________________
my Tumblr
Pixelmon Server Info
FFXI-AH Profile
#51 May 19 2012 at 3:33 AM Rating: Decent
Frankly I'm surprised we don't have more "Oh, Arizona" threads. They're way worse than Florida.
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
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.
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 83 All times are in CST