Stand your ground laws...

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Ok - stupid question - who goes around with a loaded rifle or shotgun in their trunk?

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Oh my, you would be surprised what people carry around in their vehicles.

It's called Not too uncommon in rural areas.

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

It's called Not too uncommon in rural areas.

Yep, in rural areas, but I doubt that lady is a deer hunter.

[AVGWarhawk]

I was not just talking about guns in trunks either!! As many cars as I worked on over the years you would be astonished what's lurking in the trunk, under the seat or in the console.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

I was not just talking about guns in trunks either!! As many cars as I worked on over the years you would be astonished what's lurking in the trunk, under the seat or in the console.

Women's panties and used condoms! (oh and misc assortment of narcotics probably)

[soopaman2]

A buddy of mine is a mechanic, and all he finds are pot seeds.

I guess it is all region dependant?

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Women's panties and used condoms! (oh and misc assortment of narcotics probably)

One day I was assigned to work on a woman's Cordoba. She left the windows closed and a few filled diapers in the back seat. It as a 90 degree day.

Worked on a van that delivered meat. It had no windows and hooks on the ceiling. Needless to say the back of the van looked like a scene from Criminal Minds.

But yes, empty beer/liquor bottle, condoms, soiled underwear, knives, bats, steel bars under the front seat. Old food. People are nuts.

[garren]

Originally Posted by August

Hmm, good point. Some form of "I will take that gun away from you and rape you" would about cover it I think.

That wouldn't be enough to justify shooting someone unless she was cornered and he started to approach her in a threatening manner. But in the video she takes the time to open the trunk of her car and pull out a shotgun. Then she walks over to him with it and aims it at his leg. Looks like she shot him in the leg or foot and then he swung at her to defend himself but she ran off and turned back to aim at him again and shot him dead. She was out in the open at a gas station. She wasn't cornered up against a wall. She had avenues to escape. So there's no way in hell she's going to be able to claim self-defense or stand your ground in this case and hope to win.

What's going to hem this woman up is - instead of getting in her car and driving off or running away to get help, she took the time to go into her trunk to get a weapon. And the guy just stood there while she did it. He wasn't posing an imminent threat to her life and that's clear as day in the video. Doesn't matter what he said. His body language doesn't suggest he was posing any imminent threat to her.

Being verbally assaulted is never grounds to use physical violence or a weapon on anyone - ever. The verbal assault will allow her to plead guilty to a manslaughter charge and beg for leniency on how many years in prison she's going to have to do, instead of pleading not guilty and the prosecution nailing her and going for a 2nd degree murder charge which might result in a life sentence.

If I was her attorney I'd tell her to plea bargain with the prosecution in exchange for leniency on a manslaughter charge and with a promise she wouldn't have to serve more than 10 years in prison with a chance to parole in 3 to 5 years for good behavior. I'm sure her lawyer will ask them to just give her probation or house arrest at first but I doubt they will be that lenient with her. So I think 3 to 10 years total is what she'll get and she'll have to wear the conviction on her record for the rest of her life which means no more guns for her in the future.

This way she only does 3 to 10 years in prison and can eventually come out and start a new life for herself. If she wants to be defiant and plead not guilty and make the state fight the case then the prosecution is going to go for the kill and nail her on a 2nd degree murder as the major charge and manslaughter as the minor charge (up to the jury to decide) without leniency which will earn her at least 20 years to life in prison. That would be foolish on her part when she could maybe get away with only having to do 3 to 10 instead.

[CaptainHaplo]

Originally Posted by garren

This way she only does 3 to 10 years in prison and can eventually come out and start a new life for herself. If she wants to be defiant and plead not guilty and make the state fight the case then the prosecution is going to go for the kill and nail her on a 2nd degree murder as the major charge and manslaughter as the minor charge (up to the jury to decide) without leniency which will earn her at least 20 years to life in prison. That would be foolish on her part when she could maybe get away with only having to do 3 to 10 instead.

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.

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.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

You can't tell from the video what is being said or what he has in his other hand.

Which is exactly why we should hold off on judging either way. I do agree with Garren
in that she did seem awfully calm if her life was indeed in danger.

But, we know very little of what went on, so is there point speculating? I'm sure
there will be more info available later on.

[AVGWarhawk]

There is no doubt the man is chastising or reprimanding her for something. What is being said is the question. There is one witness kind of taking it all in but 10 feet from them. Heck, he kind of stays cool after she pulls out the shotgun. I would have been gone in a flash!

[Platapus]

Never a need to keep a loaded shotgun in the trunk.

What you need is a Trunk Monkey

[CaptainHaplo]

Regardless of what one uses - lethal force used to protect against perceived imminent threat of harm or death is what this woman will claim.

I doubt it ever goes to trial, and if it does she should walk.

Note: Only once in the video (the portion we see) does he face toward the camera. Does he know its there and is hiding something from it, like a knife? Eyewitness says he had one.... though they didn't say one was found on him or near him.

We know too little to be SURE of what happened - and thus she should walk because of the presumption of innocence.

So - looking back at the comment by Platapus - it should be an affirmative defense. This is a good case as to maybe why it should.

So lets go over the pro's and cons of it using this very shooting....

[garren]

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.

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.

[CaptainHaplo]

Originally Posted by garren

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.

The key in the case you reference is that the woman left the room, got the gun and then re-engaged her husband. It also did not help that she lied about the shot she fired - claiming she fired at the ceiling when the bullet hit head-high in the door jam/wall.

The differences are critical. The case you reference there was no witness except the husband. In this there is a 3rd party witnessing him going after her with a knife - at which point she fires. Based on that account, he instigated the threat (similar to the TMvGZ case) and she reacted with lethal force.

Yes, she retrieved the gun, but did so AS he was continuing to verbally engage her - perhaps with threats, perhaps not. With his back to the camera, he could have shown her the blade and told her what he planned to do, etc. Then again, he could have been complaining about how she pulled into the parking spot. The thing is - she gets the gun and takes one step towards him - he moves forward - watch his leg - he PUTS it in the path of the gun - and intentionally moves up against her. If a knife was in his hand at that point - I don't blame her for pulling the trigger.

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.

Maybe - maybe not. We can't see what he has in the hand he swings at her - he has SOMETHING, but you can't tell what. If its demonstrated to be a knife, I'd give her the benefit of the doubt to be sure. If the argument was him trying to get some tail - even more so.

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.

We know this from the eyewitness and the injuries. If there was a knife as the witness claims, it could have been placed at her gut while he told her she didn't have the guts and he was going to have some fun with her. IF she is indicted then we will have to see where the evidence goes....A knife not seen on camera (and note how he almost always kept his left side away from the recording) but present and the testimony of "he came at her with a knife and she shot him" is pretty imminent - at least in my book.

This woman had avenues to escape and instead of taking them - she chose

Forgive the partial quote, but this is the crux of the discussion - stand your ground. She didn't escape or retreat. In a case where you feel threatened - should you be able to use lethal force without retreating?

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.

Well unless there is more info than I am aware of, I don't know if she fired once or twice. If twice and it was a shotgun, it had to be a double barrel unless she retreated, reloaded and then shot him. Not enough on the tape to see that. Yes he jumped and they separated as he swung, but I am not convinced she actually did fire - much less hit him in the leg. He moves pretty well for a guy who took buckshot in one leg before the tape ends if that is the case. Given no audio and no details on the number of shots fired, its an assumption that the swing and fatal shot were preceded by another weapon discharge. Granted - it looks like it may have been, but there are indications on the take that no shot was fired initially - no visible concussion (pant leg movement, ground impact shards, dust flying etc considering it was pointed generally at the ground. No blood flying from the shooting "victim", and so on.).

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.

The swing was warranted IF he was unarmed and she did in fact fire / shoot him in the leg. None of that is clearly proven or stated in the article or video. If she DIDN'T shoot fire (hitting him or not) then the swing was NOT warranted. Also - if he was armed with a knife then it was warranted anyway. I do have to take exception to the idea you raised that she had the "the bigger weapon" so by taking a step toward him it made her the threat. The "size of the weapon" doesn't matter - a lethal weapon is lethal - and that step forward could easily be seen as a way for her to clear her car enough to bring the weapon to bear. As such, it could be a reasonable act necessary for self defense (since we don't know if she saw the supposed knife). Notice she didn't raise it at him, its pointed toward the ground. To call that a threat doesn't make sense to me. He actually approaches, turns side on and sticks his leg / foot out - at least that is the way it appears.

Like the last case - we don't yet know all the facts - and what we do know is incomplete.

What is truly a sad commentary about this case is not just the loss of life for one family and the uncertainty and fear for another - it is that no one around the situation stepped in and helped calm the situation before it ever got to that point.

[garren]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

The key in the case you reference is that the woman left the room, got the gun and then re-engaged her husband. It also did not help that she lied about the shot she fired - claiming she fired at the ceiling when the bullet hit head-high in the door jam/wall.

The differences are critical. The case you reference there was no witness except the husband. In this there is a 3rd party witnessing him going after her with a knife - at which point she fires. Based on that account, he instigated the threat (similar to the TMvGZ case) and she reacted with lethal force.

Yes, she retrieved the gun, but did so AS he was continuing to verbally engage her - perhaps with threats, perhaps not. With his back to the camera, he could have shown her the blade and told her what he planned to do, etc. Then again, he could have been complaining about how she pulled into the parking spot. The thing is - she gets the gun and takes one step towards him - he moves forward - watch his leg - he PUTS it in the path of the gun - and intentionally moves up against her. If a knife was in his hand at that point - I don't blame her for pulling the trigger.



Maybe - maybe not. We can't see what he has in the hand he swings at her - he has SOMETHING, but you can't tell what. If its demonstrated to be a knife, I'd give her the benefit of the doubt to be sure. If the argument was him trying to get some tail - even more so.



We know this from the eyewitness and the injuries. If there was a knife as the witness claims, it could have been placed at her gut while he told her she didn't have the guts and he was going to have some fun with her. IF she is indicted then we will have to see where the evidence goes....A knife not seen on camera (and note how he almost always kept his left side away from the recording) but present and the testimony of "he came at her with a knife and she shot him" is pretty imminent - at least in my book.



Forgive the partial quote, but this is the crux of the discussion - stand your ground. She didn't escape or retreat. In a case where you feel threatened - should you be able to use lethal force without retreating?




Well unless there is more info than I am aware of, I don't know if she fired once or twice. If twice and it was a shotgun, it had to be a double barrel unless she retreated, reloaded and then shot him. Not enough on the tape to see that. Yes he jumped and they separated as he swung, but I am not convinced she actually did fire - much less hit him in the leg. He moves pretty well for a guy who took buckshot in one leg before the tape ends if that is the case. Given no audio and no details on the number of shots fired, its an assumption that the swing and fatal shot were preceded by another weapon discharge. Granted - it looks like it may have been, but there are indications on the take that no shot was fired initially - no visible concussion (pant leg movement, ground impact shards, dust flying etc considering it was pointed generally at the ground. No blood flying from the shooting "victim", and so on.).



The swing was warranted IF he was unarmed and she did in fact fire / shoot him in the leg. None of that is clearly proven or stated in the article or video. If she DIDN'T shoot fire (hitting him or not) then the swing was NOT warranted. Also - if he was armed with a knife then it was warranted anyway. I do have to take exception to the idea you raised that she had the "the bigger weapon" so by taking a step toward him it made her the threat. The "size of the weapon" doesn't matter - a lethal weapon is lethal - and that step forward could easily be seen as a way for her to clear her car enough to bring the weapon to bear. As such, it could be a reasonable act necessary for self defense (since we don't know if she saw the supposed knife). Notice she didn't raise it at him, its pointed toward the ground. To call that a threat doesn't make sense to me. He actually approaches, turns side on and sticks his leg / foot out - at least that is the way it appears.

Like the last case - we don't yet know all the facts - and what we do know is incomplete.

What is truly a sad commentary about this case is not just the loss of life for one family and the uncertainty and fear for another - it is that no one around the situation stepped in and helped calm the situation before it ever got to that point.

He swung at her after she shot him in the leg. I'd swing at her too for that.