Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo
She has a witness that says he went after her with a knife to start the whole thing. You can't tell from the video what is being said or what he has in his other hand.
|
Doesn't matter. The video clearly shows she was not in imminent danger from him. She took the time to go into her trunk while he just stood there. Then she approaches him with the gun. He doesn't approach her. She shoots him in the leg and he swings at her. I would too if some crazy woman shot me in the leg. Then she runs off and then turns to aim at him and shoots him again to kill him. This is not self-defense or stand your ground. It's manslaughter.
Quote:
No jury of 6 (usually its 12 in a felony case - the TMvGZ case surprised me with only 6) or 12 is going to convict when she pleads he propositioned her for sex, she turned him down, he pulled a knife and so she shot him in the foot, he swung and she shot again. Not when she has a witness on the knife and the initial unwanted sexual advances.
|
I'm sure there's a lot of bias in favor of women who claim some guy was going to rape them. But I don't see it in the video. He may have propositioned sex and she turned him down and he got angry with her but I don't think he was going to rape her - not in a public gas station with witnesses. I think he was hounding her and I'm sure she said things back to piss him off even more. But I'm telling you this woman lost her case the moment she went into the trunk to get that gun. Had she been carrying a pistol or had the shotgun out from the start then there'd be more merit in the case.
There was a woman in Florida who shot at her husband but she lost her case and got 20 years because she went to go retrieve the gun from another part of the house and then came back to shoot at him. That's similar to what happened here.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1530035.html
And I'm telling you that if this woman in this Houston shooting doesn't make a plea deal with the prosecution she's going to get hemmed up like the woman in the article I linked you to. There has to be clear and convincing evidence that she felt her life was in "imminent danger" from the man and that's not what the video shows - at all.
Zimmerman was on the ground getting his skull smashed against the concrete over and over and his nose broken. He had a clear and present danger to his life and he was cornered (under Trayvon) with no way to escape. That's imminent danger.
This woman had avenues to escape and instead of taking them - she chose to open her trunk (took several seconds to do this) grabs the shot gun (more seconds) turns around to face the man behind her (more seconds) and then walks up to him with the gun (more seconds and shows the threat was now coming from her because she had the bigger weapon and she approached him) they talk for a few seconds (then bang - in the leg) he swings (who wouldn't? The crazy woman just shot him) then she dodges his swing and runs away several feet. The man stays where he was shot (leg is messed up) she aims at him again and fires killing him.
I just don't see the imminent danger to her life. I do see the imminent danger to him from her when she shot him in the leg. That swing from him was more than warranted. Had he killed her right then and there then he would be the one claiming "stand your ground" and would have been justified in doing so.