FL Mom gets 20 years for warning shots - Zimmerman Walks...

So Zimmerman follows, somehow gets in a confrontation with, and eventually kills Trayvon Martin. He is aquitted and will be a free man.

In the same state, just two days ago, a woman fired WARNING shots against her physically abusive husband. She didn't hit or kill anyone, but will be spending the next 20 years in prison.

www.cbsnews.com...

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. - A Florida woman who fired warning shots against her allegedly abusive husband has been sentenced to 20 years in prison. Marissa Alexander of Jacksonville had said the state's "Stand Your Ground" law should apply to her because she was defending herself against her allegedly abusive husband when she fired warning shots inside her home in August 2010. She told police it was to escape a brutal beating by her husband, against whom she had already taken out a protective order.

Alexander was convicted of attempted murder after she rejected a plea deal for a three-year prison sentence. She said she did not believe she did anything wrong.

So I guess the moral of the story is that if you're going to fire a gun, make sure you kill anyone that might be nearby and then claim self-defense.

How the hell does this make sense to any thinking individual?


I guess having a ton of money to spend on your defense, thanks to donations from major organizations, really pays off.

In order for the law to apply as it did with George Zimmerman, it would have to be in self defense. Was she suffering severe bodily harm at the time she was shooting at her husband? Could a reasonable person say that she was in fear for her life ?

And that's why she goes to jail and Zimmerman goes home.

Do you have more info on the case? Sounds like her defense didn't use stand your ground defense.

Peace

Originally posted by jam321
Do you have more info on the case? Sounds like her defense didn't use stand your ground defense.

Peace

She was recently denied a new trial after appealing to the judge to reconsider her case based on Florida's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law. The law states that the victim of a crime does not have to attempt to run for safety and can immediately retaliate in self-defense.

Alexander's attorney said she was clearly defending herself and should not have to spend the next two decades behind bars.

Please read the source before commenting. Thanks!

Originally posted by TinkerHaus
Judge Daniel said the law did not allow for extenuating or mitigating circumstances to reduce the sentence below the 20-year minimum.

I think its just another example of the "zero tolerance" stupidity thats invading the world.
It doesnt allow for common sense or rationality.

For all I know, the judge might have wanted to just give her a $500 fine.

reply to post by Fromabove


You don't need to be suffering severe bodily harm - You need to have a legitimate fear for your physical well being or life. It's obvious that she did.

I love how you guys try to spin this by misinterpreting the law. =]

Originally posted by TinkerHaus
Please read the source before commenting. Thanks!

After reading the comments that people are making about her case, its clear that any "stand your ground" situation doesnt apply here.

SHE was arrested for a previous domestic violence assault, not him. Thirdly, SHE left the scene, acquired a weapon, returned to the scene and fired shots WITH HER CHILDREN PRESENT.
I am certain of one thing....NO ONE who fears someone goes to a safe place and returns !!

Once she left the house to go to her car, that law no longer applied to the situation. By returning to the house, she showed she was not in fear, so shooting at her husband is attempted murder.

These important details were missing from the news story.

CBS has materially altered and manipulated this story into something it isn't.

reply to post by TinkerHaus

Please read the source before commenting. Thanks!

Duh! Where did you think my comment came from? I asked for more info. you do understand the word more?

Do you really expect to make a similarity on the two cases based on an article?

Provide what her defense did? How long did her trial last? Evidence? Witnesses? Trial transcripts?

Peace

Where's Nancy Grace? Someone call Gloria Alred! If BO had an abusive husband, he would look like this guy.

OK, for real, on the surface, it seems like a crazy long sentence for some trying to protect themselves and not hurting anyone. What is up with the justice system in Florida anyway???

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by TinkerHaus

 

Please read the source before commenting. Thanks!

Duh! Where did you think my comment came from? I asked for more info. you do understand the word more?

Do you really expect to make a similarity on the two cases based on an article?

Provide what her defense did? How long did her trial last? Evidence? Witnesses? Trial transcripts?

Peace

Duh indeed. The point is she didn't actually KILL someone, regardless of all of the details - yet she is spending 20 years in prison.

What more do you really need to know?

The difference is she didn't have a hundred thousand to spend on lawyers.


But, because you can't figure Google out..

justiceformarissa.blogspot.com...
www.huffingtonpost.com...

The charge was "aggravated assault without an intent to kill."

She was basically given 20 years for firing a gun/brandishing. Her own son's testimony confirms she never pointed the gun at any people, but instead used it to PROTECT HERSELF as she was legally entitled to do. Testimony indicates that brandishing was not enough to get her husband to leave the premises, so she fired a warning shot into the ceiling.

But, again, all of this is only slightly relevant. My point was that it's ok to kill someone, but not to fire a shot to scare someone away. This is wildly inconsistent.

And do you think 20 years is a reasonable term? Mandatory minimum sentencing is obviously not appropriate in some cases.

*Marissa Alexander is a 31 year old mother of three who had just given birth to a premature child nine days before her arrest on charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon without intent to kill after discharging a legally owned firearm in the home jointly owned by her and her estranged husband at the time, Rico Gray. Rico Gray’s children were present in the apartment at the time.

*Her husband Rico Gray has an alleged history of physical abuse that he has alternatively admitted and denied.

*Neither the defense attorney nor the prosecutors dispute that Marissa Alexander was a likely victim of domestic violence. However, Angela Corey’s office argued in a brief that the violence only resulted in “minor bruising” and never “resulted in serious bodily harm to her.”

*Marissa Alexander fired a shot into the wall of the apartment that neither killed nor hurt anyone. She claimed the shot was fired in self-defense, but prosecutors claim it was out of anger.

*Rico Gray called the police (the 911 tape is below) alleging that Marissa fired the gun at him and his children.








*After Marissa’s arrest, Rico Gray gave a 66 page deposition where he admitted that Marissa did not point the gun at him or his kids and that he would have “put his hands on her.” It was in this same deposition that we heard that he put his hand on “all five of his babies’ mamas except one.” He would later retract those statements, saying that he made them up to protect Marissa Alexander.

*After the initial incident and while out on bond, Marissa was arrested for an alleged attack on Rico Gray where he claimed she gave him a black eye and she was taken to the hospital.

Source

Really sad, hopefully she can get somewhere with rappelling again. Looks like for now Jeb Bush's 10-20-Life law (Florida Statute 775.087) won with "fire a gun - 20 years."

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by TinkerHaus
Please read the source before commenting. Thanks!

After reading the comments that people are making about her case, its clear that any "stand your ground" situation doesnt apply here.

SHE was arrested for a previous domestic violence assault, not him. Thirdly, SHE left the scene, acquired a weapon, returned to the scene and fired shots WITH HER CHILDREN PRESENT.
I am certain of one thing....NO ONE who fears someone goes to a safe place and returns !!

Once she left the house to go to her car, that law no longer applied to the situation. By returning to the house, she showed she was not in fear, so shooting at her husband is attempted murder.

These important details were missing from the news story.

CBS has materially altered and manipulated this story into something it isn't.

If this is true then it does sound like attempted murder and not self defense. She left the scene and then returned? Doesn't sound like she was afraid it sounds like she was pissed off.

reply to post by TinkerHaus


or dont follow the advise of idiot bumbeling biden,if you fire warning shots your saying you are not in fear of your life hence not shooting the person you are a fraid of ,firing warning shots is illegal in every state i belive this is why among other reasons why this lady is getting the book thrown at her,also she went with stand your ground,where as zimmerman went with self defense

reply to post by playernumber13


A woman scorned, indeed. I'd say leaving and then returning does cook her goose on that one move alone. Pretty clear. She chose to come back armed. Bad move and defense goes out the window as premeditation to homicide comes floating on in like a bad fart on the breeze.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000




Yup. She's lucky she didn't shoot and kill the guy or it would have been first degree murder!

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by TinkerHaus
Please read the source before commenting. Thanks!

After reading the comments that people are making about her case, its clear that any "stand your ground" situation doesnt apply here.

SHE was arrested for a previous domestic violence assault, not him. Thirdly, SHE left the scene, acquired a weapon, returned to the scene and fired shots WITH HER CHILDREN PRESENT.
I am certain of one thing....NO ONE who fears someone goes to a safe place and returns !!

Once she left the house to go to her car, that law no longer applied to the situation. By returning to the house, she showed she was not in fear, so shooting at her husband is attempted murder.

These important details were missing from the news story.

CBS has materially altered and manipulated this story into something it isn't.

I posted a link to the KNOWN FACTS of the case. Something someone leaves in a comments section is hardly reputable. The husband acknowledges that he has been physically abusive.

This whole trayvon case is part of the bigger picture.
Think about this-People and children get killed/murdered everyday in cities big and small. EVERYDAY someone kills someone else and it only gets a ten second mention on the local news.

Why is this case so special?
Why does this case stand out?

I don't understand the hype. Yeah its sad but it happens daily. Why is this case so Damn special?

reply to post by otie1


Why do the media turn any of the cases into super-stories that cover from start to end verdict these days? Something about this one got their attention and/or got the attention of politicians. Flip a coin for all the sense it makes in which one does vs. doesn't. Look at Holloway and Aruba. You'd think a citizen had never, ever been killed in a foreign tourist trap before. Who knows how these things work?

This story is complete BS with the mass media.

I did a deconstructing disinfo thread here, on it. I hope they let it stand because I spent awhile putting it together.

I would have had it up sooner, but too much typing.



Since my thread has been closed I reposted content here.

reply to post by TinkerHaus

So I guess the moral of the story is that if you're going to fire a gun, make sure you kill anyone that might be nearby and then claim self-defense.

How the hell does this make sense to any thinking individual?

You should read my thread on it:

1. There was a restraining order against her and she was not supposed to be there.
2. She was on bail for abusing her abusive boyfriend
3. Forensics suggest she was aiming at him or near him not at the ceiling (not really a warning shot)
4. She went back to her vehicle in the garage to get a gun, and then returned to fire. (Saying "I've got something for you")
5. She was offered a 3 year plea deal but didn't take it because they thought they could win, (Her being a defenceless woman in the eyes of the jury and all...)