Skip to comments.No decision in 'stand your ground' claim in unrelated case heard by Zimmerman judge
Posted on 12/10/2012 10:05:35 AM PST by Uncle ChipEdited on 12/10/2012 10:41:41 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
On Monday Circuit Judge Debra Nelson heard testimony in the case of James Fraleigh, a Casselberry man who is accused of striking a neighbor with a shovel. Fraleigh says he did so in self-defense after the neighbor, Dylan Wells, attacked him.
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
Unbelievable that there’s any question at all as to the legitimacy of protecting yourself anymore, stand-your-ground laws or not.
What have we become?
What have we become?......................... Answer: BIZZARO LAND!
He was probably trimming his Ro-Sham-Bo.
Check out the deceased perp, one of Obama’s sons,at http://www.peekyou.com/dylan_wells
Oh my — his user name: “that_nigga_dylan”
There is yet *another* case that matters in this case. That was heard by the same judge, who denied the stand your ground defense, but the jury acquitted him anyway.
Kishawn Jones, a homeless man, bought a pistol, and still owed $20 for it. The man who sold it to him and his brother demanded the $20, and took his gun away, but gave it back after he said he would give them the $20. However then the men decided to intimidate him, threatened him, and overturned a table as if they were going to hit him with it.
He fired three times, killing one of them. The judge said “(the men’s) actions would not have caused a reasonable person to fear that he was about to be killed or endure great bodily harm. The jury acquitted Jones, however, finding that the state had not proven Jones’ guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.”
Sounds like someone else here also had issues:
However then the men decided to intimidate him, threatened him, and overturned a table as if they were going to hit him with it.
Why do I find it hard to belive that they attacked him after giving him the gun back.
If they did they are dumber then a box of rocks or the defentant just lied about it.
Why do I find it hard to believe that they attacked him after giving him the gun back.
If they did they are dumber then a box of rocks or the defendant just lied about it.
If they did they are dumber then a box of rocks...
This was probably a thug thing. If you have thugs for neighbors who are wrecking your property and harassing you, you would be nuts not to be armed and ready. It is guarenteed they will move in for the kill when they get themselves jacked up enough.
There will be a growing clash of cultures between the welfare mob who rent on section eight due to foreclosures and homeowners unfortunate to be their neighbors. Diversity racism and harassment is big in the welfare culture right now.
That cockyness and aggression is what did Trayvon in. Alot of Obama’s sons are going to be dead. Liberals know it and are hoping to get some property owners in prision for self defense.
There was an escalation.
First they demanded the money. Then they asked for the gun back, until he had the money, and he gave it to them. But then he assured them he would get them the money, so they gave him the gun back.
I am guessing he probably said something to them, or one of them said something to the other that made them suddenly turn on him and threaten him, then overturn the table at him.
In any event, the jury believed him, and apparently some other witnesses, so even though the judge said it wasn’t SYG, the jury acquitted him. In the articles about it I saw it suggested that “the state had not proved its case against him beyond a reasonable doubt.” But what that means in this instance I have no idea.