|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 31, 2019, 07:04 PM | #126 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
Again, please cite a legal example not involving LEO where the aggressor backed up, was shot while doing so, and the jury found the shooter not guilty.
|
August 31, 2019, 07:57 PM | #127 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,463
|
Quote:
Why? In Florida, the current self defense statute, i.e. the law on the subject, in pertinent part reads: Quote:
The issue presented by the incredulity that anyone could disagree with the jury's conclusion is whether a jury could conclude that a defendant reasonably believed that using or threatening to use such force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself where an attacker has increased the distance from his victim. We already know that a grave physical threat can involve momentary retreat. It isn't unreasonable to believe that something that has happened in the past can happen again. If you concede that fact finder could conclude that a defendant reasonably believed that using or threatening to use such force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm where an attacker has increased the distance from his victim, then you cannot believe that simply increasing distance from a victim invalidates a self-defense claim.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by zukiphile; September 1, 2019 at 10:41 AM. |
||
August 31, 2019, 08:00 PM | #128 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
So...you can't.
|
August 31, 2019, 08:15 PM | #129 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,463
|
Did you read and understand the post above?
Quote:
It's easier to explain what the law says than engage in review of fact patterns in jury cases. If you believe the explanation is false in some way, you should feel free to explain how. If you believe producing a case citation is required to support a point, then I invite you to produce the Florida case that holds that a successful self-defense claim requires a closing assailant.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
September 1, 2019, 06:37 AM | #130 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
You are making a statement without stare decisis support.
|
September 1, 2019, 07:26 AM | #131 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
She was clearly shooting at her fleeing attackers who suffered a sudden lack of firmness of resolve when they went from hunting to being hunted. I know the case didn't make big news because no one can virtue signal and call her a racist but it is still a pretty important case.
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
September 1, 2019, 07:28 AM | #132 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” Last edited by USNRet93; September 1, 2019 at 07:34 AM. |
|||
September 1, 2019, 08:03 AM | #133 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,463
|
Quote:
Stare decisis isn't a feature of jury verdicts. It mean that the decision of a court on a matter of law should be left to stand. So, if Buckley v. Valeo stands for the proposition that the 1st Am. protects campaign contributions as speech, but allows for some regulation, observing the same proposition the next time a campaign contribution is litigated would be an example of stare decisis in the area of campaign financing and free speech. Jury verdicts don't do that because they aren't decisions about what the law is. If you really doubt that, consider whether the OJ jury verdict means as a matter of law that if you are an ex football player and actor, if the police find your bloody footprints near your ex-wife (killed with a knife) and your bloody gloves and have a photograph of your hand just after with a cut, and have your house guest as a witness, you are a free man. Of course, it doesn't. Juries don't make laws to which other courts must adhere; they do determine facts on a specific case. That Drejka shot not while the attacker was advancing and was found to have killed without the benefit of legitimate self-defense is not a legal precedent to which subsequent fact finders in other case have any obligation to adhere. I hope that makes that clearer. The law in this case is Florida statute. It is explained to a jury in instructions, but the law itself isn't made by the jury. I'd ask you to read post 127 and let me know if it was clear as well.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
September 1, 2019, 08:14 AM | #134 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,463
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by zukiphile; September 1, 2019 at 08:37 AM. |
||||
September 1, 2019, 08:50 AM | #135 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Not foresight but observation of what was happening at the time of trigger squeeze..
Quote:
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” |
|
September 1, 2019, 09:22 AM | #136 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,463
|
Quote:
I don't know that he was convinced of anything, or if he was. Quote:
I begrudge no one their agreement with the verdict. The ambiguity if the evidence shouldn't be impossible to see.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|||
September 1, 2019, 09:42 AM | #137 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
from Tampa Day Times. Quote:
BUT, I'm also not going to be silent..but yelling at guy who pushed me down to back off(did the SYG shooter say anything before shooting? Don't know)..hope there's video or witness'..or maybe not, if the guy ends up dead.
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” Last edited by USNRet93; September 1, 2019 at 09:55 AM. |
||||
September 1, 2019, 10:19 AM | #138 | ||||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,463
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The statutory test doesn't require that you agree that death or GBI are imminent. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
||||||||||
September 1, 2019, 03:35 PM | #139 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
Quote:
In his dazed condition and from the ground, could he tell that the threat was probably over and stop before he pulled the trigger? I don't know. Did the jury even consider that? Don't know that either.
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth |
|
September 1, 2019, 03:39 PM | #140 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,328
|
Quote:
Backing up in a fight does not mean retreat. It very well could mean the last thing you see before death. |
|
September 1, 2019, 03:40 PM | #141 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,328
|
Quote:
NO, he as attacked with extreme violence. |
|
September 1, 2019, 03:44 PM | #142 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
It is classic ability, opportunity, jeopardy, preclusion. You need to be able to demonstrate that a reasonable person, who knew what you knew, would have reached the same conclusion.
Is it is possible his retreat was to gain a better advantage for attack? Sure; but if you can’t explain why you believed that in a way that sounds reasonable to the average joe, you are probably going to be convicted. |
September 1, 2019, 04:29 PM | #143 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
[QUOTE]davidsog
Senior Member Join Date: January 13, 2018 Posts: 945 Quote: In his dazed condition and from the ground, How did he get in that dazed condition on the ground? Was he suddenly sick?? Quote:
You really need to stop exaggerating he was pushed, if that is your view of extreme violence you have lead a very sheltered life. This is a example of extreme violence. Quote:
What would he have being charged with probably as bellow. Quote:
Last edited by manta49; September 1, 2019 at 04:35 PM. |
|||
September 1, 2019, 05:05 PM | #144 | |||
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,476
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO 1911 Certified Armorer Jeepaholic |
|||
September 1, 2019, 05:17 PM | #145 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by manta49; September 1, 2019 at 06:02 PM. |
|||
September 2, 2019, 08:03 AM | #146 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” |
||
September 2, 2019, 09:38 AM | #147 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Whether a push, or even this particular push, is “extreme violence” is irrelevant. One of the factors that must usually be met is the other person must use or threaten to use force likely to cause death or serious bodily injury.
Pushing someone, just by itself, has caused both death and serious bodily injury. Pushing someone in a parking lot with parking curbs to bounce your head off or passing vehicles to stumble in front of is a very dangerous thing for people to be doing. Had the pusher kept advancing, I think a competent case can be made for self-defense under Florida law. Would it have succeeded? Maybe. There are still lots of people (as demonstrated in this thread) who think themselves wise to the ways of the world and who are unaware of the regularity with which a grown adult male slamming his fist into your head or pushing a 200lb guy down onto concrete causes serious injury and sometimes death. Those people won’t think it was OK to shoot until the other guy seriously injures you, and then maybe. If they are on your jury, you’ve got a hard sell. Here you’ve got a harder sell because with no apparent weapon and having created space, it is difficult to argue opportunity existed even before the problems with preclusion. |
September 2, 2019, 10:35 AM | #148 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 20, 2007
Posts: 2,458
|
And there are many people, as evidenced by this thread, that are already putting their case together for shooting someone. Jury? Folks like us, who carry pistols for self defense, are going to be questioned in detail during voir dire. Pretty good chance we won't make the cut. The jury pool here in the north end of Appalachia is pretty familiar with various forms of violent behavior. Most have known of, seen or participated in a parking lot shoving match. I personally know of two cases where someone was killed or injured (brain damage) by a single punch or hitting their head on the curb. It happens. But if you start the fight and then escalate it from empty hands to gunfire, your odds of acquittal are poor indeed.
|
September 2, 2019, 11:42 AM | #149 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
Quote:
|
|
September 2, 2019, 11:50 AM | #150 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 6,165
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|