View Single Post
Old December 21, 2018, 07:28 AM   #31
Senior Member
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 5,464
Just for myself, I have seen and read a little extra along with the two shown links. There is no question in my mind at all that he should have been convicted, especially if he didn't answer all of the relevant questions with all of the right answers.

how many times did he leave a place of safety and re-engage the men who had not, as far as can be proven, engaged in activities that justified deadly force in the first place?

He obviously, clearly planned for a confrontation, meaning that he knew in advance that it would be happening. He obviously, clearly stepped out of line when he continued to shoot at the men who had disengaged. having 'no duty to retreat' cannot be interpreted as having a legitimate right to pursue and continue to engage the suspects, not at all.

The laws as written in florida don't give any support at all, nothing, zippo, to support his decision to pursue and kill a home invader. The laws are simple and once you go outside of those protected circumstances, the laws are written to protect the person who used defensive force to defend himself, not to go on offense.

Castle law of florida is likewise devoid of any justification for his actions.

The presumption set forth in subsection (2) does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person;
The titleholder went into the home, and unless he engaged in activity that justified the use of force under the stand your ground law, there may be some question. Stand your ground law doesn't limit the location, it gives blanket protection anywhere from defense as far as the law provides. In fact, if those circumstances are considered, it's really unclear that the guy had the right to fire. There was no obvious or proven justification in form of an attack or serious crime in process. In fact, from what is available, it seems that the 'invader' would have been thoroughly justified in killing the 'resident' under stand your ground law when the resident showed his gun.

These statements are what I am getting from the very simple, very clear few sentences that are part of the codes of the state of florida.
briandg is offline  
Page generated in 0.03390 seconds with 8 queries