Harold Fish conviction overturned - Page 4

Harold Fish conviction overturned

This is a discussion on Harold Fish conviction overturned within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Thats some great news....

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 62

Thread: Harold Fish conviction overturned

  1. #46
    Member Array SlowSSls1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    95
    Thats some great news.


  2. #47
    Member Array socal2310's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Camarillo, CA
    Posts
    467
    Captain Crunch,

    Section 10, Clause 1: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
    The Federal Government is likewise constrained by Article 1, section 9.

    Ryan
    Those who will not govern their own behavior are slaves waiting for a master; one will surely find them.

  3. #48
    1943 - 2009
    Array Captain Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    10,372
    Socal2310,

    Yes, I'm aware of Section 10, Clause 1.

    Apparently the Arizona Legislature thinks differently.


    When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
    And the women come out to cut up what remains,
    Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
    And go to your God like a soldier.

    Rudyard Kipling


    Terry

  4. #49
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    28,336
    Quote Originally Posted by gasmitty View Post
    However, the law which is hopefully going to be fixed (which applies in the Fish case) is not specifically about a criminal act, it's about whether the defendant or the state has the burden of proof to prove self-defense case.
    I wish Arizona citizens well, in this fight.

    Here in Oregon, a person is presumed guilty if charged and has the burden of proof to show the defensive actions were justifiable. It should be the other way around, that guilt must be proved if claim is made that the actions could not have been defensive in nature.

    Oregon Revised Statutes 161.055

    Burden of Proof as to Defenses.

    1. When a “defense,” other than an “affirmative defense” as defined in subsection (2) of this section, is raised at a trial, the state has the burden of disproving the defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
    2. When a defense, declared to be an “affirmative defense” by chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971, is raised at a trial, the defendant has the burden of proving the defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
    3. The state is not required to negate a defense as defined in subsection (1) of this section unless it is raised by the defendant. “Raised by the defendant” means either notice in writing to the state before commencement of trial or affirmative evidence by a defense witness in the defendant’s case in chief. [1971 c.743 §4]
    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, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  5. #50
    VIP Member Array JerryM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,091
    I have some difficulty thinking that "fear of my life" is not a defense in AZ.

    In fact the only reason to use deadly force anywhere that I know of is fear of death or great bodily harm.
    If that has no legal standing, then what is justification for using deadly force?

    Are you just nit picking with specific terms?

    Regards,
    Jerry

  6. #51
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    11,248
    Quote Originally Posted by JerryM View Post
    I have some difficulty thinking that "fear of my life" is not a defense in AZ.
    Once again, self defense was a legitimate legal defense for a long time in AZ, dating back to the territorial days. In 1997, AZ law was changed and then "people involved in self defense had to admit guilt before proving their own innocence by 'justification'" (per Alan Korwin).

    This was recognized as an abomination which ran counter to the laws of nearly every other state in the Union, and in 2006 the law was changed so that self defense had to be disproved by the prosecution.

    Harold Fish's trial had just begun when the AZ legislature changed the law in 2006, but the existing standard of proving self defense remained on Fish. The legislation just approved by both houses of the Arizona legislature (which will become law as long as Gov. Brewer does not veto it) changes the date of effectivity of the self-defense burden of proof back to 1997.

    The 2006 legislation also re-stated the "Castle Doctrine:" "there is no duty to retreat before threatening or using force and a person is presumed to be acting reasonably if he is acting to prevent the commission of any of the enumerated offenses." [The enumerated offenses pretty much cover all threats of grievous bodily harm to yourself and your family and those in your care.]

    Note to socal2310 and Captain Crunch, this legislation does not constitute an ex post facto law as it only addresses the burden of proof; Harold Fish will remain charged with homicide unless the State declines to re-try the case. Hopefully, the State will recognize that their case is weak now they they have to prove that Fish did not act out of a reasonable fear of his life.

  7. #52
    1943 - 2009
    Array Captain Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    10,372
    Quote Originally Posted by gasmitty View Post
    Note to socal2310 and Captain Crunch, this legislation does not constitute an ex post facto law as it only addresses the burden of proof; Harold Fish will remain charged with homicide unless the State declines to re-try the case. Hopefully, the State will recognize that their case is weak now they they have to prove that Fish did not act out of a reasonable fear of his life.
    That's good to know. My earlier post about ex post facto
    laws was just playing devil's advocate.

    I think this bodes well for Mr. Fish.


    Montana passed this similar law this year:

    Justifiable use of force -- burden of proof. In a criminal trial, when the defendant has offered evidence of justifiable use of force, the state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's actions were not justified.


    When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
    And the women come out to cut up what remains,
    Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
    And go to your God like a soldier.

    Rudyard Kipling


    Terry

  8. #53
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,874
    I honestly don't know enough about this case or it's history, nor more about the incident than I read in the two OP's links. However, seems this one could be debated from both directions pretty strongly. I would have to hear more of the facts and evidence to say he should or shouldn't be found quilty.

    But if a man is charging someone obviously holding a gun, they are either the stupidest person allive, are surely not thinking clearly, or mean harm ... and believe the other person won't shoot.

  9. #54
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    11,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Eagleks View Post
    I honestly don't know enough about this case or it's history, nor more about the incident than I read in the two OP's links. I would have to hear more of the facts and evidence to say he should or shouldn't be found quilty.
    As a Distinguished Member of this forum, you owe it to yourself to go to Harold Fish Defense and spend a good hour reading about the case. If you start with the original appeal, you'll get a good flavor for it.

  10. #55
    VIP Member
    Array Saber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona
    Posts
    2,591
    This case is very important to the defendant and the rest of Arizona citizens. Not only was this a true miscarriage of justice, it demonstrates corruption in the prosecutor’s office and the law enforcement community. In the eyes of the prosecutor, the only option the defendant had was to be legally right and dead. The prosecutor wanted everyone to go to jail that survived and I’m actually surprised the dogs were not charged with aggravated assault.

    The only solitude we’ll have is that the defendant goes free and the prosecutor chases ambulances or files bankruptcies for the rest of his career.
    Regards,
    “Monsters are real and so are ghosts. They live inside of us, and sometimes they win.”
    ~ Stephen King

  11. #56
    Member Array BillR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Flagstaff, Arizona
    Posts
    293
    Glock 22, NS
    Glock 20, NS
    Ruger MkIII bull-barrel
    Quote Originally Posted by Dal1Celt View Post
    You can't cure stupid, but you can give it a good whoopin to straighten it's thought pattern.

  12. #57
    VIP Member Array Cupcake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    3,164
    That's GREAT news!
    Spend few minutes learning about my journey from Zero to Athlete in this
    Then check out my blog! www.BodyByMcDonalds.com

    Cupcake - 100 pound loser, adventurer, Ironman Triathlete.

  13. #58
    VIP Member Array zacii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    arizona
    Posts
    3,807
    It's good that this story ends well. It's not good that nowadays, it seems like everyone is guilty until proven innocent.
    Trust in God and keep your powder dry

    "A heavily armed citizenry is not about overthrowing the government; it is about preventing the government from overthrowing liberty. A people stripped of their right of self defense is defenseless against their own government." -source

  14. #59
    Senior Member Array McPatrickClan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    East of Ft. Worth, Texas
    Posts
    612
    Hope that the state supreme court does uphold the appeal!

  15. #60
    VIP Member Array stormbringerr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    2,207
    i read about Mr.Fishs case.im glad this passed. some of these prosecutors really turn my stomach.justice doesn't matter as long as i win the case.i also did not think much of this weak so called judge either.AZ. get rid of these two.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.”
    ― Thomas Paine

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Kal Penn (Harold & Kumar) Robbed
    By filinoy-pi in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 21st, 2010, 08:08 AM
  2. Harold Fish granted new trial
    By Anubis in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 25th, 2009, 02:18 AM
  3. Replies: 25
    Last Post: June 23rd, 2008, 12:58 PM
  4. How to spot a redneck with a DUI conviction
    By Andy W. in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: August 19th, 2007, 01:21 PM
  5. University of Utah Gun Ban Overturned
    By Captain Crunch in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: September 12th, 2006, 08:42 PM

Search tags for this page

case study, harold fish
,
case study: harold fish
,
fish conviction overturned
,
harold fish
,
harold fish affirmative defense
,
harold fish conviction overturned
,

harold fish story

,

harold fish update

Click on a term to search for related topics.