Racisms talk

[brinstar]

again, not fair to say she "left the situation"

it was her own house

[Menelvir]

I've already agreed that based on what I knew, 20 years sounded very excessive.

You'd have to ask the judge why they imposed that sentence -- I believe Florida has a "10-20-Life" law, so it may be that the judge was complying with the law when he/she imposed sentence.

[Harrison]

After reading a bit more about the woman's case, I don't really see many similarities.

If the threat to your life is imminent, it is unreasonable to expect that you can willingly leave the situation (remove yourself from the source of the immediate threat) in order to obtain a weapon (by going out to your car), then choose to re-enter the situation (by re-entering the house), re-exposing yourself to the threat, attempt the use of deadly force (by discharging the weapon), and expect that the law will see this as self-defense.

If she had the opportunity to get to her car, it is reasonable to assume at that point, she was able to retreat safely, and that she could have driven away.

Once you've retreated, if you then go back, that is a willful decision to re-enter the situation where you're claiming there was a threat.

If she'd been armed while she was in the house, and he knocked her to the floor and started hitting her, I'm thinking that the law would consider that a singular situation - if at that point she reasonably feared her life was in imminent danger, she might then have been justified in discharging the weapon (and coincidentally killing her assailant).

If Zimmerman was on the ground getting beaten, got up and ran to his truck, retrieved a weapon, and shot Martin, that might have produced a different outcome (depending on particulars). But the general assumption would be that if he could get back to his truck safely, that he could retreat safely from the situation and use of deadly force at that point would not be legally justified.

There are always going to be particulars for any given case that a court will review with a very high degree of scrutiny.

Stop being racist. Making sense around here is not allowed. You have to agree with everything they say about this or you're racist.

[brinstar]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Menelvir]

I try to look at each case with impartiality, and I don't seek to make comparisons between cases solely because the outcomes in both are unjust or unbalanced.

One case involved a domestic dispute inside a dwelling that obviously had considerable history between the two people involved (and if they're married, it's his house too, btw - so it's not like he's someone that has no right to be there) -- the other case involved two complete strangers outside on roughly neutral ground (even though both were living/staying in the subdivision).

Both cases raised self-defense claims in court. I think that's about where the similarities end.

[brinstar]

(and if they're married, it's his house too, btw - so it's not like he's someone that has no right to be there)

uhhh normally yes, but i believe the restraining order she had against him said otherwise

[Menelvir]

And he had a restraining order against her as well, if I got the facts accurately.

So unless that entails that her restraining order trumps his, and that she has a right to enter their jointly-owned house in his presence and that he must immediately vacate, I'm not sure where that leaves the idea that if he physically strikes her, she's within her right to leave the room, get a weapon, come back into the room, point the gun in his general direction, pull the trigger, and then claim she acted in self-defense.

*I also understand two of his children were present in the room when she fired the weapon

[brinstar]

where'd you read that he had one on her? i am trying to find a news report that says he had one against her at the time* and am coming up empty. plus, not every married couple co-owns their home. maybe they do, but every story i can dig up says it was "her" home, not "their" home

also, leaving via the garage was apparently not an option - gray's deposition says the garage door was locked because it had been malfunctioning, and alexander's deposition says she did not have her keys. police records show that there was no evidence the garage door was malfunctioning, so the truth is murky - but either way i continue to argue that she didn't/couldn't "leave the situation". the judge denied a SYG immunity hearing on the grounds that she should have just fled, but i think the wording of the SYG law says otherwise. the law states:

“A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force.”

not engaged in unlawful activity, check
attacked in a place where s/he has a right to be, check, thus no duty to retreat and the right to SYG and meet force with force


*a few months later SHE went to HIS house and assaulted HIM, which violated conditions of her bond mandating they have no contact, but that was a separate incident

[leah]

plus, not every married couple co-owns their home. maybe they do, but every story i can dig up says it was "her" home, not "their" home.

was just going to say this, ha. the house that the mister and i live in is completely in my name.

[10sun]

plus, not every married couple co-owns their home. maybe they do, but every story i can dig up says it was "her" home, not "their" home.

was just going to say this, ha. the house that the mister and i live in is completely in my name.

Depending on your state, he has ownership rights whether you like it or not.

[Tikker]

.

[brinstar]

well a few months after the original incident she violated her bail conditions to go give him a shiner at HIS house

[Gaazy]

Hi everyone.

So Ive been bringing my dog to work lately.


That is her sitting on my couch in my office

Today she peed in the floor




oh wait, this is the racism thread, sorry. Return to your talk of others things that dont matter, like how black trayvon is and how white harri is. Enjoy

[leah]

OSNAP that dog is cuuuuuuuute <3

[brinstar]

ol' zimmy's back in the news today! guess he paid a visit to his wife at her parents' house, bashed her dad in the nose, then threatened them and trashed her ipad

gee, who could've predicted he'd turn out to be a violence-prone sociopath?

[Drem]

lol wow

what a piece of shit

[Harrison]

I remember some other violent "sociopath" involved with this media obsession...

Lol oh he's dead.

[Zanchief]

You think he would have learned his lesson. Leave no witnesses and you can say what ever you want.

I don't get this story. The arresting officers say they found no gun on him, yet his lawyer says he never unholstered it and just put his hand on it.

Also how the fuck is this turd still allowed to have a gun?

[Harrison]

Second amendment. He has the right to own a gun.

[brinstar]

You think he would have learned his lesson. Leave no witnesses and you can say what ever you want.

I don't get this story. The arresting officers say they found no gun on him, yet his lawyer says he never unholstered it and just put his hand on it.

Also how the fuck is this turd still allowed to have a gun?

there's apparently debate over the presence of a gun, which is why i did not say anything about a gun in my post. further details have emerged saying the wife video'd the entire thing with her ipad, but then ol' fat&crazy grabbed it and smashed it to pieces. it's now in a forensics lab to see if any footage can be salvaged. "he feels invincible," says the wife

anyway in other news, the CME who performed the autopsy on Trayvon Martin claims the prosecution threw the case. he is preparing a lawsuit:

Through his high-profile attorney, he claims the medical examiner, state attorney's office, and Sanford Police Department were all biased against Martin.

"He says their general attitude was that he got what he deserved," Attorney Willie Gary told Channel 9.

Gary said Dr. Bao was made to be a scapegoat and was wrongfully fired from the medical examiner's office. He said his client was prepared to offer proof that Martin was not the aggressor.

"He was in essence told to zip his lips. 'Shut up. Don't say those things,'" Gary said.

Gary said prosecutors never asked Dr. Bao a question crucial to their case.

"He wanted a question that would have allowed him to explain to the jury with scientific evidence how there was no way Trayvon Martin could have been on top of George Zimmerman," Gary said.

Gary said that question never came.

[Harrison]

Speaking of racism, it's oddly quiet in the media about those black kids murdering a man out for a jog, for funsies, already.

How long were we inundated with the "omg poor trayvon" shit?

[Zanchief]

Did the kids get caught? Were they released without charges because of the "he's coming right for us defense"? No? It's not the same at all.

[brinstar]

it's fun to read mindia's posts with stephen colbert's voice, makes them almost bearable

but when i read posts like that from knuckles the chimp it just sounds like one long fart noise

[Harrison]

I see.

Translation: "I don't want to compare the two, because it makes my stance look like the hilariously sad bullshit that it is, so I will say you can't compare them."

I wish the real world functioned like that. But, we don't live in imagination land where you are.

[Zanchief]

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt one more time.

The reason people were upset was not because some poor black kid got killed. It's because a man killed an unarmed kid and wasn't even arrested. You find me a case where a black kid guns down a white kid and doesn't even get arrested and we can talk, otherwise, stay out of an adult conversation.