Stand Your Ground Double Standard in Florida? Say it Aint So

[Vashon]

That makes this an open and shut case. Stand Your Ground doesn't apply in the Zimmerman case, as he had the option of NOT FOLLOWING. Murder 2 guaranteed, as he deliberately followed his victim and shot him.

You do realize that the physical part of the confrontation happen when he had stopped following and looking for the kid and was in the process of returning to his vehicle right?

[Lord MJ]

She was denied a new trial.

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2012 ... our-ground

Judge denies Jacksonville woman new trial despite 'Stand Your Ground' claim
Marissa Alexander faces a 20-year sentence after court says no self-defense.
Posted: May 3, 2012 - 9:54am | Updated: May 4, 2012 - 7:13am
Back Photo: 1 of 3 Next

BOB SELF/The Times-Union
Attempts to use the Stand Your Ground defense to free Marissa Alexander from a possible 20 years in prison on three counts of aggravated assault fell short Thursday morning in a Duval County courtroom.



By Charles Broward
A judge denied a new trial Thursday for a Jacksonville woman who has gained national support for her assertion that she stood her ground firing a warning shot against an abusive husband and now can expect a 20-year sentence.

Defense attorney Kevin Cobbin spent about 40 minutes arguing on behalf of 31-year-old Marissa Alexander. He based much of it on what he called limitations the court placed on testimony that could support Alexander's claim of her husband's reputation of abusing women.

Authorities said Alexander shot in the direction of 36-year-old Rico Gray during an August 2010 dispute at their home with his two children in the house.

It took a jury just 12 minutes to find Alexander guilty in March of three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Alexander, who rejected an earlier plea deal, said she was in fear of her life and fired the single shot to get Gray out of the house. She said she had tried to leave through the garage before getting her gun, but the door wouldn't work.

Circuit Judge James Daniel denied all of Cobbins' pleas for a new trial, repeatedly referring to the accounts of two witnesses who did testify about Gray's violent reputation.

Cobbin argued that the court also erred in denying Alexander immunity in a Stand Your Ground hearing in July 2011. The law has become a firestorm for debate following the February killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin by a neighborhood watch volunteer in Sanford.

It helped elevate Alexander's cause as the NAACP's Jacksonville chapter issued a letter to the judge, supporters have rallied outside the courthouse and national media have zoned in on her story.

Cobbin added that new evidence pertaining to the details of the incident was not known at the time of the hearing.

That new evidence included the testimony of one of the victims, Gray's son, who at first told authorities he was in fear of his life during the shooting. But at Alexander's trial, he said he was not.

The judge said it would be improper, however, to reverse Circuit Judge Elizabeth Senterfitt's previous findings in the immunity hearing, which would ultimately translate into an acquittal.

"Maybe I would be agreeing to a new Stand Your Ground motion, which highlights some of the difficulties we are struggling with procedurally implementing this new law," Daniel said. "But ultimately the motion is denied."

Daniel said that despite any new evidence, Senterfitt's ruling was based on Alexander's decision to go back into the home armed with a gun.

"This is inconsistent with a person in genuine fear of his or her life," Senterfitt wrote in her ruling.

"She had every right to walk back in that house and had no intention of using that gun until he engaged her," Cobbin said.

Daniel said he will consider acquitting her of one of the charges based on Gray's son's testimony at trial, which he said he took as the truth, though Alexander will still face the 20-year sentence on the other two counts.

State Attorney Angela Corey said it was Alexander's choice to take the case to trial despite a plea offer that would have given her a three-year sentence. The offer was good until the Friday before her trial.

"We still considered all of her mitigation and offered to take 17 years off of the 20-year minimum mandatory, which the '10-20-Life' [law] is excellent at giving prosecutors the discretion to do," Corey said.

Corey said that offer came even after Alexander was arrested four months after the shooting on a charge of domestic abuse, again against Gray. She pleaded no contest to that charge in March following her trial and was sentenced to time served.

Gray has been arrested twice on domestic battery charges, one against Alexander resulting in a conviction and a sentence of probation. Alexander had an injunction filed against him following the attack.

"There's no set standard as to what you do when you're in fear," said Helen Jenkins, Alexander's mother. "Actually, he's still alive. That speaks well of her."

Jenkins said she was disappointed by the judge's ruling, but she and her supporters will "keep on going" to an appeal.

But not before Alexander is sentenced May 11.



Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2012 ... z1tvP9uNRy

Options now, Appeal, petition the governor for a pardon or a commutation of her sentence. While I think the time she's served should already more the cover her so called "Debt to Society" in hindsight it might have been a good idea for her to take the plea.

Though I am very put off by the prosecutors attitude "Well we offered her a deal for 3 years." Considering that is probably in excess of what she deserves even if she didn't take the plea, trying to say it's Mrs. Alexander's fault she is going to jail for 20 years, and not the horrendously poor mandatory minimums laws strikes me as arrogant and crass.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Options now, Appeal, petition the governor for a pardon or a commutation of her sentence. While I think the time she's served should already more the cover her so called "Debt to Society" in hindsight it might have been a good idea for her to take the plea.

Though I am very put off by the prosecutors attitude "Well we offered her a deal for 3 years." Considering that is probably in excess of what she deserves even if she didn't take the plea, trying to say it's Mrs. Alexander's fault she is going to jail for 20 years, and not the horrendously poor mandatory minimums laws strikes me as arrogant and crass.

Even when someone fires a deadly weapon at another person. You realize she could have killed or serious injured someone by her reckless actions.

[Lord MJ]

Options now, Appeal, petition the governor for a pardon or a commutation of her sentence. While I think the time she's served should already more the cover her so called "Debt to Society" in hindsight it might have been a good idea for her to take the plea.

Though I am very put off by the prosecutors attitude "Well we offered her a deal for 3 years." Considering that is probably in excess of what she deserves even if she didn't take the plea, trying to say it's Mrs. Alexander's fault she is going to jail for 20 years, and not the horrendously poor mandatory minimums laws strikes me as arrogant and crass.

Even when someone fires a deadly weapon at another person. You realize she could have killed or serious injured someone by her reckless actions.

Which is why (if it really doesn't full under self defense) I would support a guilty verdict, not a 20 year sentence. Even considering the fact she could have killed or serious injured someone 3 years is more than enough to get the point across. Even if she actually did kill or injure someone (provided she was not intending to hit her husband and it was not self defense) 20 years is still too long. Though in that case I would not have much sympathy for her if she rejected a plea if offered.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Which is why (if it really doesn't full under self defense) I would support a guilty verdict, not a 20 year sentence. Even considering the fact she could have killed or serious injured someone 3 years is more than enough to get the point across. Even if she actually did kill or injure someone (provided she was not intending to hit her husband and it was not self defense) 20 years is still too long. Though in that case I would not have much sympathy for her if she rejected a plea if offered.

Oh yeah. Sorry, I should have been more clear. I agree. 20 years is a excessive. I was refering to three years.