Where a Redneck Jew, a Hispanic Catholic, and a Computer Geek write about Gun Rights, Self Defense and whatever else we can think about.
If anything, they are predictable:
Yup, the same event we already covered a couple of days ago. Now, we will wait for the inevitably “Stand Your Ground is unfair to black” and other BS. I a, gonna be so sorry to tell her that Floridians of all colors are pretty much in favor of the law and no to waste her time, but I know it will fall in deaf ears.
Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.
Comments are closed.
I wonder just what her ARMED bodyguards would do if an unarmed black man came up to her and shoved her to the ground with as much violence as was displayed there? My guess is not invite him to stay for coffee.
I believe I read somewhere that the local prosecutor was looking into whether or not to bring changes. The determining factor here I believe will be what the attacker said after he shoved him onto the pavement. It does NOT look like he was backing up, nor reacting to the gun as most people I know what do–running, backing up quickly, evading the guys line of sight.
Perhaps that why it took a little more than 3 seconds for him to shoot the attacker. Perhaps the attacker continued with a verbal dare, or a repeated threat. I do not see any avoidance by the attacker…this sends up a red flag in my mind.
I also want to know what types of injuries resulted from that harsh shove.
Now, if the attacker spoke words of regret, and submission, well, then this is a whole other situation.
The element of “reasonableness” is key here. And there was a witness to the verbal altercation which lead to this blind attack. It will come down to the wife-girlfriend and the bystander who witnessed it.
Witnesses? Everyone who viewed the video of the complete encounter.
I think he means about words traded between the parties.
Hmmmm… if I were on Twitter, I’d be demanding statements from Alyssa Milano every time there’s a shooting in Chicago.
KMSP TV – Fox9 in Minneapolis had a story on the shooting. The narrative/ angle was Stand Your Ground resulted in the shooting of a black man.
The stated cause of the death was, “A fight over a parking space.”
They used video of the protests, and they showed the shooting video starting at the point where the shove happened. The reporter stated there was an argument and implied the argument was between the two men, not the victim and the woman in the car. Combined with the edited video that doesn’t show Mr. McGlockton stomping out of the store and shoving the victim to the ground without warning, it paints a picture of a shouting match between the two men that escalated into a shoving match and then the victim shooting Mr. McGlockton dead as part of an escalating argument.
I can’t find a copy of the story on their website. They usually don’t post them.
To quote Ted Nugent:
“If you don’t want to get shot, don’t attack people.”
I certainly wouldn’t generally defend Alyssa Knuckehead, but based SOLELY on the video here, I would probably file charges. There is of course more, and depending on what other witnesses said, that could change. If all I had was the video, it appears to me to be what would be, in my jurisdiction, 1st degree, or 2nd degree. And we have SYG.
And yes, I am a lawyer, and have been a prosecutor.
Doesn’t first defree require premeditation?
How would you prove or argue it based solely on the video?
It does. And my argument, were I the prosecutor, would be that “premeditation” does not mean advanced planning. It means “made the decision to kill before doing the act.” This was not a quick, unthinking reaction; there were palpable seconds, during which the original assailant backed away. Then he fired. He made the decision to kill, prior to pulling the trigger.
I suspect that the jury would likely convict on 2nd. And as a prosecutor, I’d probably take involuntary manslaughter as a plea. But if you make me go to trial, I’d go on 1st degree. I can make a legally viable and reasonable argument that the shooter made a conscious decision to kill.
I am not in Florida, BTW, so I will not attempt to speak to Florida law. Note I wrote “in my jurisdiction.”
Thanks for the follow up and clarification.
I definitely get your argument and where you are arguing from, and the little glimpse at how the sausage is made is nice. Your clarification however, does raise the following questions for me:
Couldn’t the argument be made that any self defense shooting is a conscious choice to kill? Isn’t that premeditation by that standard as described by you; a simple choice of one action over another without forethought? Is not the simple act of preparing for the use of deadly force during self defense by carrying a deadly weapon premeditation by that standard?
I personally am on the fence for this shooting, audio or testimony as to what was said would be quite nice as I believe Miguel also stated. I see the merit of both side arguments. FWIW and IANAL but I can definitely see second or manslaughter but I think 1st is unachievable unless there is some other evidence of premeditation we do not have or if the supposed constant lot patrol by the shooter would meet that standard.
All self defense shootings are choosing to kill? I’d phrase it as choosing to stop the threat, but yea.
The question is one of justification – the law does not bar killing, but “murder,” generally described as the killing of another “without legal justification or excuse” (very broadly generalized). The same can usually be generalized for any use of a defensive weapon, whether there is a death or not.
The question here is – is there justification under self-defense law for this use of force (and the subsequent death). Generally, that requires not only a subjective belief that force is necessary to stop the imminent attack, but that there are objective facts that support that belief; the proverbial “reasonable man” must, in the shooter’s circumstances, would also believe use of force is justified under the law. In my jurisdiction, an unreasonable but honest belief that force was justified is a voluntary manslaughter. Prison. And the jury decides what the shooter believed. The truth, as always, is whatever the jury says it is.
So is that satisfied here? I don’t think so, based SOLELY on the video. Had the assailant stepped forward to press his attack, that would have been quite different, but he didn’t. There is time here for the shooter to take stock and think about his next act, not just instantly react. Note, however, a camera is a one-eyed monster; there may well be other information from witnesses that effects the decision. The camera, for example, tells us nothing of what was said, and by whom.
Man who would no likely our comments? Maybe we should have sworn at each other lol.
Well I had a nice comment written up that was eaten by the internet so I will go with something a bit shorter.
I am with you 100% at this point on justification, kill being the wrong word, and your interpretation of the video. After rewatching it and thinking on it, it does appear that the shover disengaged after the firearm was produced. Hopefully more evidence will come to light to clarify things.
You haven’t convinced me that 1st is appropriate though and lacking any other evidence of planning or forethought on the shooters part, I don’t think I’ll be convinced. I’m with ya on 2nd or manslaughter all day though.
THAT is why I read this blog, daily: thoughtful commentary, by folks who may or may not be subject matter experts, but reflect learning and consideration in their comments. It’s particularly wonderful when the commenters ARE SME.
Mr. GMC70, thank you for your comments.
if I was the old guy (I am actually old) and some big dude came out of nowhere and shoved me smack onto the ground and loomed over me, saying I don’t know what, I would assume that he was about to stomp me and, to an old guy, that’s tantamount to a death sentence. I would have shot, too.