Blanca, I am confusing nothing. Please read section 776.032 of Florida Statutes:
Quote:
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
|
The section immunizes a shooter from suit by an innocent bystander injured or killed by a reckless shooter so long as said force is being used in circumstances covered by one of the three itemized subsections. You are correct in that it covers more than the historic common law Castele Doctrine.
Tell me this. Two couples are having drinks on the screened in porch of the house belonging to John. Everyone is plastered. Jim makes a crude remark about John's wife Jill and and argument breaks out. Jim is asked to leave and he leaves the house only to return a few minutes later. John and his wife, Jill, refuse to allow John onto the porch, but John forces his way in by breaking the lock on the screen door. Even though Jim hasn't done anything to indicate that he intends bodily harm to anyone, other than yankihng the porch screen door so hard as to break the hook latch, Jim pulls a 9 mm out of a drawer and starts firing rapidly in the general direction of Jim. All 8 shots miss Jim, but Nancy, Jim's pregnant wife is shot. She loses the baby. The little girl playing along the sidewalk in front of the house is shot and she loses an eye.
I have it on good authority that drunken John is immune from criminal or civil action under Florida law for shooting Nancy, for killing the baby, and shooting the little girl playing on the sidewalk since he is "presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to Jim who had or was unlawfully and foricibly entering John's residence.
Please explain how this is not so. Force was definiteley being used against a person who had or was unlawfully and forcibly entering John's home.