Posted on 03/23/2014 5:55:57 PM PDT by marktwain
HB 89, a reform of the "Stand Your Ground" law, passed the Florida House on 20 March with a vote of 93-24. The law extends the same immunity given to people who actually shoot someone in self defense to those who only threaten force or fire warning shots in self defense.
The bill was given impetus by the Marissa Alexander case where the defendant claimed to have fired a warning shot, but was sentenced to 20 years in prison under Florida's mandatory sentencing laws.
The bill has brought together a coalition of diverse supporters, including the Florida Public Defender Association and the NRA.
“We see, routinely, clients that we believe shouldn’t be prosecuted because they did act in lawful self-defense,” said Stacy Scott, the Gainesville-based public defender for the 8th Judicial Circuit. “We’re fighting those cases in court every day.”The reform bill also provides for the expungement of records in self defense cases. From bradenton.com, Representative Matt Gaetz:
“The point is to make sure that someone who appropriately uses the ‘stand your ground’ defense doesn’t have their life ruined by the use of that defense,” Gaetz said.This site shows the recorded vote of 93 to 24. The bill passed with strong bipartisan support.
Save
No, from the DA's words, she viewed it at intimidation. Yes, the charge was aggravated assault, and as I said, Corey is renowned for over-charging.
In this case the fault is the Florida minimum sentencing laws. It is a stupidly long sentence, but it's also mandated by the law. The DA had nothing to do with it. In fact, Alexander was offered a plea deal for 3 years, but turned it down.
Goes back to overcharging, which Corey specifically does in her own attempt at intimidation. i.e. "Think you are innocent of murder? Well then, you had better plea to manslaughter." Whether Alexander should have taken the plea deal or not, is non sequitur to whether she was guilty of the greater charge. A person should be charged with the crime you think they committed, not with some greater crime with the desire of intimidating them into a plea deal.
Good!
Oops! my warning shot went right between his eye’s sorry about that.
> The law extends the same immunity given to people who actually shoot someone in self defense to those who only threaten force or fire warning shots in self defense.
Thanks marktwain.
From my reading of the story, I viewed it as she missed, and then claimed it was a warning shot.
Warning shots, legal or not, are a dangerous, foolish and irresponsible act. Innocent bystanders are going to get hurt, exactly as the anti gun forces pushing this law want, and this will be used against 2nd amendment rights.
I agree!
Aggravated assault is the crime she committed. This isn't over charged.
Also no reference to Je$$e Jerka$$ or Albert the Rotund ...
I agree warning shots are foolish. Never draw a gun on anyone unless you are prepared to shoot them. Words to live by. Hopefully your fears about this law will turn out to be unfounded.
She is either a horrible shot or the reports I read were badly in error, as I read that she shot into the ceiling, when her ex-husband was less than 10' away.
LegalInsurrection.com, which covered the trial, included the following prosecutor's statement:
STATE OF FLORIDA VS. MARISSA ALEXANDERSo, yes the bullet ultimately ended up in the ceiling, but she fired in the direction of her husband's head, and missed (deliberately or thru incompetent marksmanship, was never established).Marissa Alexander to her husband: “I’ve got something for your ass.”
The FACTS :
In August 2010, Marissa Alexander was arrested by the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office (JSO) after she shot at her husband and two step-children (ages 10 and 13) in the couple’s Jacksonville home. It has been erroneously reported that Alexander fired a warning shot into the ceiling in order to escape her abusive husband. That information is inaccurate. The facts of this case, from the actual trial testimony, are as follows: Alexander and her then-husband, Rico Gray, were living together in their home. The two had a verbal argument over text messages Gray found on his wife’s phone. The messages were to and from Alexander’s ex-husband, Lincoln Alexander. The verbal argument started in the couple’s bathroom and moved to the living room. Gray decided to leave the home during the verbal argument and told his children to put on their shoes and that it was time to go.
In the process of Gray leaving the home, Alexander told her husband, “I’ve got something for your ass” and left the living room. Ms. Alexander then walked through the kitchen, through the laundry room, and then into the garage, where she retrieved her 9mm handgun from the glove compartment of her car. Ms. Alexander had ample time and opportunity to leave the home. (Rico Gray never left the living room area where he and his sons were about to exit via the front door.) Alexander then walked back through the laundry room and into the kitchen. When Gray saw her put a round in the chamber, he yelled “no” and tried to scoop his two boys under his arm to protect them, at which time she fired a shot into the wall, at head level – 5’8”, where Gray and his two sons were still standing. The bullet passed through the kitchen wall – bullet hole photo - exited the other side, and then entered the ceiling of the living room. Gray and his two sons then ran for their lives from their home and called 911 – Aug. 2010 call. Alexander then locked herself inside the home. [NOTE: I have enlarged bullet hole photo--the bullet hole can be seen directly in middle of photograph, at head height. -- AFB]
Pics and diagrams at the second link.
Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon was the highest charge that could be made. Reckless Endangerment and Improper Exhibition of a Firearm would have been lesser charges that most prosecutors would have chosen in this case.
Like the Zimmerman and Dunn cases, where Corey went for 1st degree murder, the Alexander case should have raised some questions concerning going for a 20 year sentence. Alexander did not have a criminal record. The dispute was with a spouse known to have been physically abusive in the past. It is most likely that she was making a demonstration of her unwillingness to back down, versus intending actual harm.
In retaliation for the negative press, Corey has since doubled down and is attempting to increase Alexanders prison time to 60 years.
Say a sixty year old man confronts teenagers on his property and fires his shotgun in the air to impress upon them that he is armed. He could be charged with Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon, but should he be so charged? Is the man really such a menace that he must be put away for 20 or 60 years?
Prosecuters have a great deal of leeway in what they charge and should look at what each case warrants, not just automatically go with the highest possible charge. For example, Bob goes on a camping trip with some friends. They open up a bottle of booze and all get lit. During the night Bob gets cold and climbs into the back seat of his vehicle to get warm. If the police roll up at that point, Bob is chargeable with a DUI, but its a miscarriage to charge him at all.
I stand corrected.
Thinking about it, for the bullet to have hit the wall at about head height, and then the ceiling in the next room implies that it was fired at an upward angle from below her head height. This would imply that she fired with the gun at waist to chest level, and was not using the sights. This would make it more likely that the only reason she didn’t hit him was because she was an incompetent shooter.
The "victim", who had put her in the hospital before, said the following at his deposition:
He claims that the text messages put him “in a rage,” and that he told Alexander, “If I can’t have you nobody going to have you.” As for her trying to flee the house, Gray “knew that she couldn’t leave out the garage because the garage door was locked.” He also tells a markedly different story about the events surrounding the gunshot: “She came back through the doors and she had a gun. And she said, ‘You need to leave.’ I told her, ‘I ain’t leaving until you talk to me’ . . . and I started walking towards her and she shot in the air.”
Frankly, neither one of them are winners, but he is less so. In a case of what is "he said, she said", a charge to get 20 years (and now 60) seems like way too much to me.
In the Dunn case an argument can be made for 1st degree murder, but even if it doesn't convince the jury, it includes lesser charges. They jury could have convicted on 2nd degree or manslaughter. Overcharging is not the reason they didn't.
In Alexander's case, like the Zimmerman case, the popular narrative of what happened that day is wrong. Alexander was not defending herself. There was no threat to her. The abusiveness of her spouse is debatable, although they clearly had a mutually abusive relationship. Marissa herself was the only one actually ever arrested and for physical abuse, in a separate case that happened after the shooting.
Her trial showed that she clearly acted out of anger. She walked out of the room and came back with a gun, said "I've got something for your ass", and fired a shot that struck the wall near his head. One might speculate she didn't mean to shoot him but what difference does that make? If she had hit him, would it have changed anything if she said she didn't mean to?
This is not overcharged.
"In retaliation for the negative press, Corey has since doubled down and is attempting to increase Alexanders prison time to 60 years."
Not true. Corey doesn't decide what sentence to persue. The charges being retried are exactly the same ones from the first trial, and the sentence is a mandatory minimum defined in the law.
What's happened is that since the first trial an appeals court in another case has ruled that these sentences must run consequtively instead of concurrently. That's how it gets to be 60 this time around. Corey had nothing to do with that.
Alexander deserves to be convicted and no doubt would be again. I do agree that 60 years or even 20 years is harsh, but that's a common result of mandatory minimum sentences. They should be done away with.
Hopefully Corey will go ahead and offer Alexander a plea deal again for something more reasonable and it doesn't go that far.
Good for Florida, I guess. Likewise, I think “warning shots” are a bad idea. And from what I’ve read of the Marissa Alexander case, what she did actually was aggravated assault.
See post 37.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.