Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: The anti-Zimmerman case

  1. #1

    Default The anti-Zimmerman case

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1530035.html

    I suspect Lewk and various fans of mandatory minimum sentencing laws are cheering about this one
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  2. #2
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Is Lewk in favor on mandatory minimums?

    I'm not in favor of them either way.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  3. #3
    To get a mandatory minimum, you first have to be convicted of a crime.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  4. #4
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    Err, yes, duh. And your point is?

    And this is exactly why I don't like mandatory minimums.

  5. #5
    "Alexander rejected a plea deal that would have resulted in a three-year prison sentence and chose to go to trial. A jury deliberated 12 minutes before convicting her."
    Hope is the denial of reality

  6. #6
    Oh yeah forgot to add that this plea system is frickin' whack.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  7. #7
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Loki, the plea system can be a bully system. You are willfully ignoring how mandatory minimums can be so out of whack of what is actually desirable for a sentence.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  8. #8
    I'm not always a fan of mandatory minimum, but in this case, the woman was convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. If the jury bought her defense, she wouldn't be serving any jail time at all. As things stand, she was convicted of a pretty damn serious crime. 20 years seems harsh given the sentences other crimes get, but if you do the deed, prepare to pay the consequences.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  9. #9
    I'm not sure this really tells a worthwhile story about mandatory minimums. Which, for the record, I have mixed feeling about. She-

    1) Got a restraining order against her estranged husband
    2) Went to their old home to take things (when she thought he wouldn't be there)
    3) Found him there and felt threatened by him
    4) Went to her car to get a gun
    5) Went back into the house
    6) Fired a "warning shot" at her ex husband

    The idea that this counts as "stand your ground" is plainly nonsense. I would hope for a prosecutor to not prosecute this because it's just a silly situation, but she owned the gun legally and how the hell could she not understand take the time to understand how the law would take her using her legally-owned gun to go back into the house to confront her husband?

    It's sad and a waste of a woman's (and mother's) life. But the insanity began way before sentencing.

  10. #10
    Unlike many of you here, I do not have a law degree, but do still work as a fraud analyst and work with LEOs.

    Some have said she could use the stand your ground law, but in my opinion she did not stand her ground. She went to her car without a gun, and came back inside which in my opinion means she thought about it (premeditation anyone). If anything this is not standing your ground but advancing which to me seems like she is the aggressor and not the defender.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    It's not okay to shoot an innocent bank clerk but shooting a felon to death is commendable and do you should receive a reward rather than a punishment

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    4) Went to her car to get a gun
    5) Went back into the house
    6) Fired a "warning shot" at her ex husband
    This is pre-meditated idiocy. 20 years seems like a long time to serve for stupidity but seriously WTF was she thinking?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  12. #12
    She claims that she went into the garage and then went back into the house because she could not get out from the garage any other way. Her claim was that one of the garage doors was locked (I believe the ex initially said the same) and that the automatic door wasn't working.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    I'm not sure this really tells a worthwhile story about mandatory minimums. Which, for the record, I have mixed feeling about. She-

    1) Got a restraining order against her estranged husband
    2) Went to their old home to take things (when she thought he wouldn't be there)
    3) Found him there and felt threatened by him
    4) Went to her car to get a gun
    5) Went back into the house
    6) Fired a "warning shot" at her ex husband.
    This is not her account of the events. Her estranged husband is by his own asmission physically abusive. She asserts that he got physically violent and tried to stop her from leaving. In other words she was being threatened by a man known to be violent. It's possible that some of the accounts of the ex husband's history of violence were deemed inadmissible in court while he in turn claimed that SHE was violent towards him. She also said that she couldn't get out through the garage doors and he was in her way when she tried to get back out through the house. She fired a shot into the ceiling when he approached her shouting threats.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  14. #14
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  15. #15
    Interesting. Arguably she should have called the police from inside her locked car, but it's hard to second-guess these things from an armchair.

    Though I agree 20 years seems excessive. Though I'm not sure how giving the sentencing over to a judge would really help too much. The judge could throw an equally-wild sentence at her.

  16. #16
    She didn't have her cellphone--Gray had it. 20 years isn't just excessive, it's wrong. It's esp. fucked-up if you believe it would be right to sentence her to 3 years.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  17. #17
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  18. #18
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Huh the same prosecutor for Zimmerman commented on this case...acting like "Meh she should have taken the 3 years'

    Maybe that prosecutor is the problem?
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    WTF!?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  20. #20
    Florida is fairly fucked up.

  21. #21
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    The state Prosecutor is fucked up.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  22. #22
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    Why not both?

  23. #23
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    True, they are not mutually exclusive.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  24. #24
    What about the Jury? I'm assuming that the author of that piece is biased and using selective quotes to make the point, but still ... based on those quotes alone I would vote to acquit
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  25. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    What about the Jury? I'm assuming that the author of that piece is biased and using selective quotes to make the point, but still ... based on those quotes alone I would vote to acquit
    Much of the evidence in her favour was deemed unreliable or otherwise inadmissible in court, some for good reasons, others not necessarily:

    http://mediatrackers.org/florida/201...ase-in-florida
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  26. #26
    So, everybody has an agenda..... What parts of the story is the Miami Herald leaving out or misreporting?
    To fully trust any news source about any event is hard to do for me, (and should be for everyone)

    If trayvon showed us anything, it's that the media is full of falsehoods and misinformation. Wish we had trial transcripts readily avail...
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    It's not okay to shoot an innocent bank clerk but shooting a felon to death is commendable and do you should receive a reward rather than a punishment

  27. #27
    The garage door seeming to work when the cops checked it is actually interesting -- after all, she had just pulled into the garage, right?

    This is why trials are conducted by juries and judges, not the media.

    Though a far more compelling and straightforward case is here. A 76 year old guy shoots his 13 year old neighbor point-blank. And captures it on his own security camera.

    http://fox6now.com/2013/07/17/jury-t...d-of-homicide/

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3612378.html

    Where's the outrage on this one?

  28. #28
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Automatic garage doors can be locked with a touch of a button, usually not near the doors but near the interior door to the house.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  29. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Veldan Rath View Post
    True, they are not mutually exclusive.
    That's another problem, not unique to Florida. Many state Attorneys General can't decide which laws to defend/prosecute, because legislatures have enacted gobbaldy-gook laws that overlap and conflict.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    The garage door seeming to work when the cops checked it is actually interesting -- after all, she had just pulled into the garage, right?

    This is why trials are conducted by juries and judges, not the media.
    FL juries and judges are hamstrung by their legislated, legal inconsistencies....and political partisanship. The Governor's task force assigned to re-evaluate SYG laws was headed by the Lt. Governor (who was forced to resign after corruption charges), and half were legislators who voted for SYG laws.

    Not to mention that their SYG laws were reportedly written by ALEC and NRA lobbyists.



    Though a far more compelling and straightforward case is here. A 76 year old guy shoots his 13 year old neighbor point-blank. And captures it on his own security camera.

    http://fox6now.com/2013/07/17/jury-t...d-of-homicide/

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3612378.html

    Where's the outrage on this one?
    What "outrage" are you looking for? WI has different laws than FL.

  30. #30
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    No, I'm thinking the AG likes to overcharge an is a politican in the making .
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •