Florida case overturned

This is a discussion on Florida case overturned within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Anyone else post this, I'm sorry...found the story interesting. New trial ordered in Fla. warning shot case | News - Home...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 43
Like Tree28Likes

Thread: Florida case overturned

  1. #1
    Senior Member Array USM1976's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    876

    Florida case overturned

    Anyone else post this, I'm sorry...found the story interesting.

    New trial ordered in Fla. warning shot case | News - Home
    garyr likes this.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member
    Array ANGLICO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    I'm the guy next door that is polite, but does not tell you crap.
    Posts
    3,486
    When she was arrested, there was (and still remains a large thread here on this). This is new.

    ...."Because the jury instructions on self-defense were fundamental error, we reverse" the conviction, a three-judge appellate panel said.

    So, regardles of her guilt or crazy acts, she is let off on the first trial on a technicality. Chances are that she will be found guilty on the second trial.
    Socialism Kills! Time proven, with a very large body count! We are a Constitutional Republic....... not a Democracy, get it correct!

    Don't be mistaken for a Gecko45: http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

    Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14qTdp-Dd30

    ANGLICO Images

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array StormRhydr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Music City, USA
    Posts
    2,944
    Its like this; the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt their case/that the defendant did it. NOT the defendant must prove a dayum thing.
    blitzburgh, PEF and msgt/ret like this.

  5. #4
    Senior Member Array USM1976's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    876
    Quote Originally Posted by ANGLICO View Post
    When she was arrested, there was (and still remains a large thread here on this). This is new.

    ...."Because the jury instructions on self-defense were fundamental error, we reverse" the conviction, a three-judge appellate panel said.

    So, regardles of her guilt or crazy acts, she is let off on the first trial on a technicality. Chances are that she will be found guilty on the second trial.

    It's not a technicality but apparently a rule of law in Florida. The state must make the self defnese laws avaialbe to the jury...sound like the prosecutor failed to do so.

    "Marissa Alexander's case will be retried because the jury was wrongly told that -- for her to claim self-defense -- she needed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that her husband was about to seriously harm her, the appellate court said.

    Rather, the appellate court pointed out, the prosecution had the burden to prove that Alexander herself was guilty of aggravated assault."


    Since when under any American xcriminal law does the defense have to prove anything ??

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array blitzburgh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Coastal SC
    Posts
    3,738
    But a judge in the pretrial immunity hearing rejected the request, saying Alexander's decision to go back into the house was not consistent with someone in fear for her safety.
    ... and there's her biggest hurdle. I'm not sure she's going to be able to get over it at the next trial.
    OldVet and The Old Anglo like this.
    "Rebellion against tyrants is obedience to God." - Benjamin Franklin
    "Experience: that most brutal of teachers. But you learn, my God do you learn." - C.S. Lewis

  7. #6
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    7,913
    SO, what I'm hearing the courts /Judge say, is that it would be better for you to shoot someone if they are strangling you, than to fire a warning shot.

    If it is about the fact that she went outside the house, and back in, then shot him, why are they throwing all this gobble-D-guuk out in the mix?
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  8. #7
    VIP Member
    Array Echo_Four's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Land of the mostly free
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by USM1976 View Post
    Since when under any American xcriminal law does the defense have to prove anything ??
    Self defense is an affirmative defense. You admit to an act that would otherwise be criminal but claim that your actions were necessary to defend your life. At that point the onus falls on you to prove that you were actually in danger. Pretty basic stuff from a legal view.
    Secret Spuk likes this.
    "The only people I like besides my wife and children are Marines."
    - Lt. Col. Oliver North

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array DontTreadOnI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,442
    Quote Originally Posted by blitzburgh View Post
    ... and there's her biggest hurdle. I'm not sure she's going to be able to get over it at the next trial.
    From everything I've read she said the garage was locked (IE: she was unable to exit that way) so she got the gun out of the vehicle and was going to exit the house.

    Every garage I've ever seen has at least one exterior hinged door and at least one vertically opening garage door though. Guess the specifics will apply here.
    Secret Spuk likes this.
    If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    5,613
    A defendant does not have to prove anything in a self defense case. The prosecution has to disprove the claim that the defendant was in fear for their life. Not the other way around. NO defendant ever has to prove anything in any trial. They are presumed not guilty until found guilty by a court of law. Every time. Regardless
    nedrgr21 and msgt/ret like this.
    " It is sad governments are chief'ed by the double tongues." quote Ten Bears Movie Outlaw Josie Wales

  11. #10
    VIP Member
    Array PEF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,530
    Marissa Alexander's case will be retried because the jury was wrongly told that -- for her to claim self-defense -- she needed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that her husband was about to seriously harm her, the appellate court said.

    Me wonders how a jury instruction gets so mucked up. Usually there are model instructions that start as boilerplate, and the sides quibble regarding language for certain facts. But that.....whoopsi-daisy!
    OldVet and msgt/ret like this.
    -PEF, a Framer with a Steelie...
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    1. All guns are always loaded.
    2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
    3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
    4. Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,020
    20yrs in prison for warning off an assailant? Had there actually been material harm, I could almost understand a stiff sentence, if guilty. One of the effects of a mandatory 10-20-life (three strikes) type sentencing structure.

    "But a judge in the pretrial immunity hearing rejected the request, saying Alexander's decision to go back into the house was not consistent with someone in fear for her safety."

    ^
    A good lesson for us all, right there. It's not merely how we see it; it's how others are going to read it that'll matter in the end.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,466
    Well, she also gets another chance for a jury to say "screw it, good for her"

  14. #13
    Senior Member Array USM1976's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    876
    Quote Originally Posted by Echo_Four View Post
    Self defense is an affirmative defense. You admit to an act that would otherwise be criminal but claim that your actions were necessary to defend your life. At that point the onus falls on you to prove that you were actually in danger. Pretty basic stuff from a legal view.
    Not in the state in which I live and according to the U.S. Constitution...it is not criminal to defend one's self...I'm speaking generally now and not specifically about this woman's issue.

    The onus NEVER falls on the accused to prove anything. It is the requirement of the state to prove you were not in line with the law (in whatever jurisdiction). This issue is basic constitutional law. You have it quite reversed.
    atctimmy likes this.

  15. #14
    Member Array grbr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by Echo_Four View Post
    Self defense is an affirmative defense. You admit to an act that would otherwise be criminal but claim that your actions were necessary to defend your life. At that point the onus falls on you to prove that you were actually in danger. Pretty basic stuff from a legal view.
    No, the prosecution must still prove your self defense claims false beyond all reasonable doubt.

    Like any other case, though, not being able to 100% prove your defense make the prosecution proving theirs that much easier. But they DO still have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.

    But if a given jury member cannot ascertain 100% certainty of either side's story, then innocent vote it is, because innocent until proven guilty. Always.

  16. #15
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    15,890
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    20yrs in prison for warning off an assailant? Had there actually been material harm, I could almost understand a stiff sentence, if guilty. One of the effects of a mandatory 10-20-life (three strikes) type sentencing structure."But a judge in the pretrial immunity hearing rejected the request, saying Alexander's decision to go back into the house was not consistent with someone in fear for her safety."

    ^
    A good lesson for us all, right there. It's not merely how we see it; it's how others are going to read it that'll matter in the end.
    It is not a 3-strike law. It's 10 years (for using a firearm in commission of a crime)-20 years (for firing a firearm in commission of a crime)-life (for injuring/killing someone, with a firearm in commission of a crime).

    Time will tell if this helps her case.
    Retired USAF E-8. Remember: You're being watched!
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

florida case over turned

,

florida case overurned

,

florida overturned

,

marissa alexander case overruled

Click on a term to search for related topics.