The future George Zimmerman Acquittal Trial Megathread!

[11B4V]

Warning shots are not authorized.

[Syt]

Still, 20 years for firing shots with no (proven) intention to harm seems a tad excessive. There's rapists who get less time.

[11B4V]

Not disagreeing.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/

According to a sworn deposition taken in November 2010, Marissa Alexander's husband, Rico Gray, 36, said that on August 1, 2010, he and Alexander began fighting after he found text messages to Alexander's first husband on her phone. The two were already estranged - according to her father, Alexander had been living at her mother's since the birth of the couple's daughter nine days earlier, and Gray, a long-haul trucker, said he spent the night before in his tractor-trailer. Gray began calling her names, saying "If I can't have you, nobody going to have you," and blocking her from exiting the bathroom.

Alexander pushed past Gray and went into the garage where she got her gun from her car's glove compartment.

Gray told prosecutors in the deposition that Alexander came back into the house holding the weapon and told him to leave. He refused, and what happened next is somewhat unclear. In his deposition, Gray said "she shot in the air one time," prompting him and the children to run out the front door. But when Gray called 911 the day of the incident, he said "she aimed the gun at us and she shot."

In August 2011, a judge rejected a motion by Alexander's attorney to grant her immunity under the "Stand your Ground" law. According to the judge's order, "there is insufficient evidence that the Defendant reasonably believed deadly force was needed to prevent death or great bodily harm to herself," and that the fact that she came back into the home, instead of leaving out the front or back door "is inconsistent with a person who is in genuine fear for her life."

Alexander's case was prosecuted by Angela Corey, the Florida State's Attorney who is also prosecuting George Zimmerman. Alexander was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and because she discharged a firearm during the incident, the case fell under Florida's "10-20-life" law, enacted in 1999, which mandates a 20-year sentence for use of a gun during the commission of certain crimes.

Corey initially offered Alexander a three year deal if she pleaded guilty to aggravated assault, but according to CBS affiliate WTEV, Alexander did not believe she had done anything wrong, and rejected the plea. Her bet did not pay off: the jury in the case returned a guilty verdict in less than 15 minutes.

[CountDeMoney]

And that she ran out of the place, got the gun from her car, and then went back inside.

Sounds kinda familiar.

[Jacob]

Of course the picture doesn't mention that in the second case the lady was standing her ground in here ex's place when she wanted to pick up her stuff. And that she ran out of the place, got the gun from her car, and then went back inside.

The difference, as I understand it, is that you have to make sure to shoot to kill. At that point, with any witnesses to the contrary dead, all you have to do is produce a reasonable doubt about whether you felt threatened and you're good to go.

[11B4V]

Of course the picture doesn't mention that in the second case the lady was standing her ground in here ex's place when she wanted to pick up her stuff. And that she ran out of the place, got the gun from her car, and then went back inside.

The difference, as I understand it, is that you have to make sure to shoot to kill. At that point, with any witnesses to the contrary dead, all you have to do is produce a reasonable doubt about whether you felt threatened and you're good to go.

That's a rather poo-poo outlook young man.

[CountDeMoney]

The difference, as I understand it, is that you have to make sure to shoot to kill. At that point, with any witnesses to the contrary dead, all you have to do is produce a reasonable doubt about whether you felt threatened and you're good to go.

Only in Florida do you get acquitted for killing somebody, but convicted for 20 years in taking an action in an attempt not to take a life.

[Ideologue]

Guy at work today, new guy, got into an argument with a black woman he didn't know about the Zimmerman verdict.

Maybe they're right not to pay us very much.

[Admiral Yi]

The difference, as I understand it, is that you have to make sure to shoot to kill. At that point, with any witnesses to the contrary dead, all you have to do is produce a reasonable doubt about whether you felt threatened and you're good to go.

She'd have to kill her kid too. 

Though I do wonder what burden of proof attaches to the reasonable threat.  Shysters?

[11B4V]

The difference, as I understand it, is that you have to make sure to shoot to kill. At that point, with any witnesses to the contrary dead, all you have to do is produce a reasonable doubt about whether you felt threatened and you're good to go.

Only in Florida do you get acquitted for killing somebody, but convicted for 20 years in taking an action in an attempt not to take a life.

Warning shot are not authorized. There unsafe. 

[Syt]

There unsafe. 

Where unsafe?

[11B4V]

There unsafe. 

Where unsafe?

anywhere.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Guy at work today, new guy, got into an argument with a black woman he didn't know about the Zimmerman verdict.

Maybe they're right not to pay us very much.

I've intentionally avoided saying or mentioning this case at work, I have too many minority employees to make any comments about it in the workplace.

As for the warning shots woman, I'll only mention that before the Zimmerman case totally got on the media roller coaster there were 4-5 other similar cases going on in Florida. Warning shots aren't really covered by either SYG or self defense law at all. Whereas actually shooting someone is.

[Razgovory]

I think avoiding discussing hot button issues in the work places is good idea no matter who's there.

[derspiess]

I try to avoid politics, particularly anything with racial undertones, at work.  But someone brought it up yesterday when 4 of us (two black, two white) were in a secured room we call "the vault" working on some tedious but sensitive stuff.  I kept quiet until they asked me my opinion-- I just reminded them of the concepts of burden of proof, reasonable doubt, etc. while acknowledging that the shooting was a shitty thing that happened and they didn't seem to object to that. 

Having worked with most people here for 7 years, I don't feel totally uncomfortable talking about stuff like that, but I still generally keep my cards close to my chest.