This was another Angela Corey case. The defendant’s husband (with a history of violence), under a restraining order got in her house where she got a gun and dispensed a warning shot.
But now Alexander has another chance. Judge James H. Daniel ordered a retrial, arguing that Alexander had been held to too high a standard to prove self-defense. “The defendant’s burden is only to raise a reasonable doubt concerning self-defense,” he wrote, which is incidentally how the jury ruled in the Zimmerman case. “The defendant does not have the burden to prove the victim guilty of the aggression defended against beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Make no mistake, Ms. Alexander has a tough case to face and she might not go free. And contrary to what the article says, this case is not Stand Your Ground either. Apparently any dubious shooting in Florida is now immediately branded Stand Your Ground by an eager and idiotic Press.
I think it is time we have some sort of modification to our self-defense laws in which brandishing in face of danger is not considered assault with deadly weapon. I would like to have more options than two: Either I don’t draw at all or I draw and put a bullet on another human being. I am all for being able to show a possible attacker that he is about tone second away from making what could possibly be the last mistake in his like and that he should change his intentions the soonest.
Hat Tip to Joseph B. via Facebook.
Practice & Train like hell, Pray to God ya never have to use it……. 🙂
I have limited sympathy for Alexander. I’ve read court documents and transcripts regarding her case and what’s being reported in the media is (shocking) not the complete story.
Alexander was in her husband’s house, they were separated and she resided elsewhere. When the husband arrived at his house, they got into a fight. He was probably guilty of domestic battery, and has a history of domestic violence, as does Alexander. According to testimony, he blocked her exit from a bathroom after looking through her phone and seeing that she had sent a text message to her ex-husband. After that fight had ended, she went into the garage to leave, and then returned with a firearm and fired a single shot in his direction, the children were standing next to him. The husband and the children retreated out of the back door and he called 911. While he was outside, she left the residence. The police were able to get in contact with her either a day or two later.
During the interview, she claimed that when she went into the garage to leave, the garage door didn’t work, remembered that she had a pistol in her motor vehicle and returned to the interior of the home, with the pistol, to attempt to make exit through another door. This was the same garage door that she used to gain entry into the home and the same garage door that she used to exit the home. She also denied firing the firearm several times until she was confronted with the evidence. After being confronted with the evidence, she claimed that she fired the firearm in self defense.
The husband is no angel, and probably deserved to be shot on several occasions. On his 911 call, he gave one story, during his interview with police, he corroborated that story, when he was interviewed by the prosecutor, he gave two different stories and admitted that he changed his testimony to protect Alexander.
While she was out on bond, it was revoked, at least once, but I’m pretty sure it was twice, for making contact with her husband, she was also under a restraining order. If I’m not mistaken, she made bond the second time, and was held under no bond when that was revoked. During one of the events that led to her bond revocation, she was arrested for domestic violence and I’m almost certain that she plead guilty.
My limited sympathy for Alexander is for her sentence. She was offered a deal with three years, her attorney advised her to take the deal and she refused. Had she been carrying her firearm when she was confronted in the bathroom and shot dude, hey, more power to her, at that time, he needed to be shot and I suspect he won’t die of natural causes.
I’m not sure on whether she fired into the ceiling or into the wall near her husband. If she fired into the ceiling, I hope her conviction remains overturned. If she shot towards her husband, and kids, I hope her sentence is time served. I also wouldn’t give a rat’s ass if her husband gets hit by a bus before the next trial.
This.
She was in another person’s residence, and therefore it is possible that she didn’t have a legal right to be there.
Subsequent to that, when the homeowner returned home, and there was a confrontation. It is *possible* that she would have been justified in using a firearm during this confrontation, but per her testimony she did not have it with her.
Instead, she went to her car, retrieved a firearm, and went back inside rather than leaving. Her subsequent use of the firearm therefore appears to have been genuinely criminal.
Is it possible that she tried to leave and was unable to due to actions taken by the homeowner? Yes. Still I would expect such evidence to have been presented in her defense, and such exculpatory evidence would almost certainly have percolated through to drive-by media sources.
Are you using some kind of autocorrect program Some of the words don’t make sense, though I can figure it out by context (period & q-mark keys not working on this end)
whose writing are you talking about? If it is me, the answer is simple: I suck 😉
This commenter is racist and isn’t sensitive you your right to live in the country and only develop a marginal grasp of the language… I however have absolutely no excuse. 😉
WTF, dude! I just wondered if it was that autocorrect app that so distorts a lot of texting I’m not criticizing his skills I have to proofread myself because I stumble over the keyboard, too
“I think it is time we have some sort of modification to our self-defense laws in which brandishing in face of danger is not considered assault with deadly weapon.”
This.
A thousand times, THIS.
Throughout nature examples can be found examples of ‘aggressive displays’ that are intended to AVOID a fight…to get the other side to back down/move away:
A diamondback’s rattle
A cobra’s hood
Elephants flaring their ears
Bared fangs (on many animals…wolves, lions, badgers, etc.)
A scorpion’s raised tail
Even chimps and gorillas make ‘displays’ by shaking trees and throwing leaves and suchlike.
These displays are not attacks in and of themselves.. they are WARNINGS…a communication that one is willing and capable to mess up your day, but would rather prefer you just move along and leave them in peace.
As humans, we can attempt this verbally, as can many of the above animals, but even in the wild, there are times when a predator/aggressor will not be swayed by noises alone. ( see also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bOQitInC84 )
Being able to back up the audio warning with a ‘visual aid’ to emphasize (or even prove) one’s capability to defend oneself often (but admittedly not always) has the desired result..the aggressor/threat backs down and leaves the intended victim unharmed.
Such displays are (generally) intended to DEFUSE threat/victim situations (when employed by the victim in response to a perceived threat), not aggravate them. (See also your ‘Portable Behavior Modificator’ post of 9-22-12, and my ‘monkey dance’ comments)