Marissa Alexander, Woman Sentenced To 20 Years For Firing Warning Shot, Gets New Trial

[RosieS57]

Source: Huffington Post

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A Florida appeals court is ordering a new trial for a woman sentenced to 20 years to prison after she fired a warning shot in a wall during a dispute with her husband.

The 1st District Court of Appeal ruled that a judge did not properly instruct the jury handling the case of Marissa Alexander.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/26/marissa-alexander-new-trial_n_3995869.html

---

Seems the SYG defense cannot be used in the new trial.

Anyway, Alexander was overcharged AND overconvicted by the same Republican State Atty. in charge of Zimmerman's lack of prosecution.

Hopefully, Ms. Alexander gets justice this time.

Regards from Rosie

[hack89]

1. Perhaps this time she will take the plea deal she refused the first time.

I don't see how she was overcharged - here are the Florida statutes:

784.011?Assault.—
(1)?An “assault” is an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent.
(2)?Whoever commits an assault shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
History.—s. 5, Feb. 10, 1832; RS 2400; GS 3226; RGS 5059; CGL 7161; s. 1, ch. 70-88; s. 729, ch 71-136; s. 17, ch. 74-383; s. 7, ch. 75-298; s. 171, ch. 91-224.
Note.—Former s. 784.02.

784.021?Aggravated assault.—
(1)?An “aggravated assault” is an assault:
(a)?With a deadly weapon without intent to kill; or
(b)?With an intent to commit a felony.
(2)?Whoever commits an aggravated assault shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
History.—s. 2, ch. 3275, 1881; RS 2402; GS 3228; RGS 5061; CGL 7163; s. 1, ch. 29709, 1955; s. 1, ch. 57-345; s. 731, ch. 71-136; s. 18, ch. 74-383; s. 8, ch. 75-298.

Her mistake was to retreat to the safety of the garage and then to return to confront her ex with a gun. That is why she cannot claim self defense.

[TinkerTot55]

4. She retreated to the garage to flee from her abusive husband, fearing for her life...

...only to find that the keys weren't where she thought they were, and that she was trapped. That's when she returned, reluctantly, to the house and was confronted by her husband.

That was her story.

Heck, seems if she wanted to shoot to kill, she could've done that....and probably would be in even less of a legal mess had she done so.

[RosieS57]

5. Indeed!

CNN reported that she had to prove she was in fear for her life; according to the instructions to the jury.

This is where the appeal error was found. The defendant was under no obligation to prove any such thing.

Regards from Rosie

[hack89]

6. Every garage door has a manual release

they are designed so you cannot be trapped in a garage.

Secondly, she could have simply stayed in the garage. There is no evidence her husband was pursuing her. If she had simply stayed there then she could claim self defense. She got a gun instead and deliberately put herself into a dangerous situation.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

10. If one did not know that (many don't) & the situation was dynamic, one would feel trapped. Period.nt

[hack89]

12. Then she should have stayed where it was safe.

she was safe in the garage.

What about her cell phone? Do you know if she had one or not?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

14. Do you? How was she safe in the garage? Husband could get in there and she

she could not get out the garage door if she did not know about the manual release or was so flustered by the confrontation that started earlier that she didn't think of it.

[hack89]

17. She had a gun. He didn't

and why didn't she grab her phone to dial 911 instead of grabbing a gun instead.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

18. She had a gun because you say she left the garage to get it.

You are losing logic.

Either she had a gun or did not. It can't be both.

[hack89]

23. She went to the garage to get her gun. She had a CCW and it was in her car. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

76. The garage in which she had parked her car the previous night.

Presumably she knew how to operate the garage door then.

[SharonAnn]

24. I'm not strong enough to open the manual release. Tried it one day when the electricity was off.

Maybe it was rusted and needed to be oiled but I couldn't do that. No ladders for me on concrete floors at my age. And I just couldn't release it. Had to call a taxi.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

29. Exactly. Thanks. Hope you got it attended to. nt

[busterbrown]

15. I don’t know where mine is...

[hack89]

19. So the inside of your garage door is perfectly smooth?

it is attached to the locking mechanism - just like any door.

If you have a garage door opener, it is a plastic tee-handle hanging on a cord from where the chain drive attaches to the door - because it is for emergencies it is usually orange in color.

[busterbrown]

34. Right and if your in a panic... You are in a panic and sometimes nothing make sense.

Don’t we all freaking know where the break pedal on our car is? Yea right just ask the hundreds who have been killed due to an accelerator break...

[hack89]

37. It was not self defense.

my only point.

[busterbrown]

38. One other ?

Is a fake fist punch to someone who is about to attack you not self defense.. I’m just asking..

[hack89]

59. Not if you left and then voluntarily came back.

secondly, shooting a gun with no idea where the bullet is going is rightfully considered a crime.

[Gothmog]

151. Why?

Her actions prevented her husband from beating her up

[hack89]

152. Because she retreated to a safe area

Last edited Fri Sep 27, 2013, 06:15 PM - Edit history (1)

her husband did not follow her.

She then got a gun and went back to confront her husband. The judge and jury all felt she could have escaped - there is no evidence her husband tried to stop her from leaving. Also, her comment that "I have something for your ass" as she went to get her gun did not help her case.

[Gothmog]

156. I disagree with your analysis

Your analysis is weak and I disagree with it. I have practicing law for more than 30 years and I strongly think that your analysis is flawed. Under you theory this lady had to stay in the garage forever.

This case was overcharged and I agree with the analysis of the court of appeals

[hack89]

159. First off I have a hard time believing she could not open the garage

secondly, even the judge questioned why she didn't escape through the front or back door.

The appeals court did not say that she was overcharged.

Time will tell.

[jamzrockz]

173. There is no evidence that her husband

was going to beat her up. The shot the gun towards the direction of her husband and 2 children. Personally, I wouldn't be comfortable with a person like her in my neighborhood. Listen to the audio of the 911 call here and you get a better insight of Marissa A

http://news.jacksonville.com/specials/audio/RicoGray911call-1.mp3

[heaven05]

53. why

do you want this woman to be over charged and over sentenced? What's the deal with you? And zimPIG walked after murdering an unarmed kid. Please. Spare me.

[hack89]

56. Florida's minimum sentencing laws are an abomination

but she was offered a plea deal - she chose to go to trial.

[heaven05]

60. and she got NO JUSTICE

at that trial. Plea deal is not always the better deal to hope for. In her case, if this jerk had his hands around her throat, cutting off the BREATH OF LIFE, he needs to be in prison where 'men' like him are dealt with effectively. He's a coward and a jerk to attack any woman that is not endangering his life with death or extreme bodily harm. No rationale can justify this woman facing 20 years in prison. Period.

[jamzrockz]

174. What is your evidence that the husband at the time put his hands on her?

Actually, on the 911 call to the police, he claimed that Marissa is the one who hit him. If this man was so dangerous, he would have beat her up the second she touched him.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

180. Eyewitness testimony. She said so herself. Under oath.

[jamzrockz]

182. I posted the audio clip for the 911 call

And from the day he described the events, it seems like she was the one who was the aggressor. She was caught sending text to her ex husband and probably didn't like that fact that she was caught.

Also the husband knew about her gun collection, so I seriously doubt he would go about beating a woman who is packing heat. At least, he wouldn't have given her the chance to run into the house to retrieve the gun. In any event, I would like to hear what the kids had to say about this whole incident.

Please try and listen to the 911 call audio
http://news.jacksonville.com/specials/audio/RicoGray911call-1.mp3

[AnotherMcIntosh]

183. Interesting. Thanks.

[rocktivity]

189. At around 2:50, he says "She pulled out a gun

Last edited Fri Mar 7, 2014, 04:05 PM - Edit history (1)

WE STARTED RUNNING, and she shot anyway."

And since there was a restraining order, she had no business going to his house without a police escort in the first place. She's no feminist "political prisoner."


rocktivity

[heaven05]

186. oh please!

you're insulting me and telling on yourself. Go read about your hero's further misadventures and be proud.

[noiretextatique]

139. excellent question

Another one: why are Zimmerman apologists so intent on punishing this woman who did not kill anyone? can they be more obvious?

[notadmblnd]

27. Would you believe that I once forgot there were manual door locks on my car?

for some reason when I hit the power button, my door did not unlock. I didn't realize until I crawled to the other side of my car to try to get out the other door that manual tabs existed. Boy did I feel stupid.

[Mnemosyne]

45. Last week I locked my unlock fob in the car. Had my key, but forgot I could unlock it manually,

I hear ya on feeling stupid!

[AtheistCrusader]

46. And if it's not in working order, or the spring is busted, she might not be able to lift it.

[hack89]

57. Her only choice then was to grab a gun and go back into the house?

there was nothing else she could have done?

[AtheistCrusader]

62. Her children were also inside the house, or had been, she may have feared for their safety as well.

Also, the husband re-entered the home. So it's not like she did something terribly unusual there.

[hack89]

64. She fired in the direction of her kids

I think they even testified against her so I am not sure their welfare was foremost in her mind.

What was unusual is she grabbed a gun and went to confront her ex.

[lumberjack_jeff]

78. I think they were his kids from a previous marriage. n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

109. She fired into the cieling above him.

[hack89]

113. And you think that was a smart thing to do?

shooting blindly, not knowing where the bullet will land? Shouldn't that be worth some prison time?

There is a reason that in most states warning shoots are illegal.

We hear endless condemnation of irresponsible gun owners here - and rightfully so. Irresponsible gun use should be punished.

[AtheistCrusader]

117. I understand why warning shots are unlawful.

But that isn't specifically what they convicted her of. They convicted her of essentially attempting to shoot him, missing, without being justified in using force in self defense.

[hack89]

118. In many states warning shots are considered aggravated assault

because it involves a deadly weapon and is in essence a threat of eminent harm. I posted the Florida statutes in my first post - go read them and you will see why she was charged as she was.

The difference is that most states don't hace draconian minimum sentencing laws like Florida. She was offered a plea deal - she should have taken it.

[AtheistCrusader]

119. Again, I understand the statute.

I have explained it to people many times on this board in the past. And it is an example of why you NEVER talk to the police without your lawyer present. If she hadn't TOLD the police she fired a warning shot, it would have been on the prosecutor to prove that she was A) Not in fear for her life and B) Didn't just fire a clean miss that was justifiable as self defense.

I agree, warning shots are incredibly dangerous, and should not be permitted. She made MULTIPLE mistakes. 20 years seems excessive though.

I don't know the specifics of the plea deal, so I cannot comment on whether it was reasonable.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

176. If so, she is a very poor shot because she hit the wall instead.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/topstories/article/329344/483/New-trial-ordered-for-Fla-woman-who-got-20-years

With a little more practice, maybe she'll be able to hit the ceiling the next time.

[AtheistCrusader]

178. It was high on the wall...

It's like.. flip a coin, above head height was how it was originally reported...

[AnotherMcIntosh]

179. That makes a difference. She aimed towards the ceiling but hit "high" on a wall.

Got it.

[AtheistCrusader]

181. In either case, she stated to the police it was a warning shot.

Prima facie evidence of and confession to, a crime.

[Blue_Tires]

185. I still say that she should have called it an "accidental" discharge...

she'd be in a much stronger legal position...

[ManiacJoe]

188. No, she fired into the wall at head level.

> She fired into the ceiling above him.

No, she fired into the archway wall at head level, according to the CSI photos.

[heaven05]

52. oh please

[tblue]

100. No everybody knows that.

Speaking from experience.

[dkf]

128. Isn't the bar whether she had a reasonable fear her life was in danger or she was in danger of

Serious bodily harm?

I see a clear case of self defense frankly.

[hack89]

146. Let look at the Florida statutes

776.013?Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1)?A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a)?The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b)?The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(2)?The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(a)?The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

She had no presumption of fearing for her life - she had to prove it to the jury. Her mistake was to retreat, grab a gun, and go back to confront her ex. Her comment of "I have something for your ass" as she went to get her gun probably didn't help her any either.

[dkf]

150. The ex admitted to prior abuse.

And she did not have to prove it to the jury, those are the incorrect judge's instructions. She just has to assert a reasonable case of self defense then the prosecution must prove it was not self defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

It sounds like you are getting the same thing wrong that the judge did.

[hack89]

153. It makes sense - you are right.

I suspect the result will be the same but we will see.

[dkf]

154. If the result is the same then I would say it is racism.

Mark Geragos says he just defended a pretty blond woman in the same sort of circumstance and she was acquitted.

[okieinpain]

158. lol, it's funny how none of these technicalities applied to trayvon

[hack89]

160. Zimmerman was guilty of manslaughter

the problem was there were no eye witnesses.

[leftyohiolib]

20. what she said was "i have something for your ass" ran to the garage and came back

with a gun.

[dkf]

129. Was that proven beyond a reasonable doubt or is that the testimony of the abusive husband?

[leftyohiolib]

135. it's what the ag said was said. the ag was doing n interview on a fla radio station .i heard the

interview on line

[dkf]

136. You want to bet that's a quote from the abusive husband?

[RosieS57]

8. Generally....

.....the weapon must be positioned to effect an assault. Mere possession or, in this case, aggravated assault of the ceiling, would not be sufficient.

It was a shot to stop his attempt to further abuse her, not to cause him great bodily injury or fear of imminent death.

You have to point the gun at a person for that

Regards from Rosie

[hack89]

9. Except she created the confrontation

if she had stayed in the garage instead of getting a gun and reentering the house then I would agree. She got a gun and confronted her ex with a deadly weapon. In the eyes of the law that is assault.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

11. She re-entered the house looking for an exit. She got the gun for self-defense. nt

[hack89]

13. She could have left through the garage

every garage door can be opened manually. I don't think she tried to leave. She went to get her gun so she could confront her ex.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

16. If one did not know that (many don't) & the situation was dynamic, one would feel trapped.

This was already explained to you in my post you replied to before you replied here.

[hack89]

21. In the eyes of the law, once you have retreated from danger

you cannot claim self defense if you grab a deadly weapon and deliberately leave your safe area to confront someone.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

31. It was not safe. That's why she left it. nt

[hack89]

35. There is no evidence her ex pursued her into the garage.

she had time to think. She had time for him to calm down. She had time to talk to him.

And if none of that worked, she could have legally shot his ass if he entered the garage.

[LanternWaste]

103. What is the precise amount of time it takes to calm down from a perceived and imminent danger

"she had time to think. She had time for him to calm down. She had time to talk to him...."

What then is the precise amount of time it takes to calm down from a perceived and imminent danger, and does that answer apply to all people equally?

Additionally, if one if in perceived imminent danger, is it reasonable to believe that that person will allow themselves an academic and objective analysis of the situation and make responsible choices reflecting that analysis, or (and I find this more likely) are we to allow for irrational behavior in times of great stress?

[hack89]

105. Then she should not have had a CCW and a gun

sounds like she didn't have the training and temperament to be trusted with a gun.

[Warpy]

94. She was cornered in that garage.

Would you like to be cornered in a garage, in fear of your life?

20 years for not shooting your husband is too much.

[hack89]

102. She shot in the direction of her ex and the kids.

were the kids a threat too?

You are right that 20 years is too much - that is why the state offered her a plea bargain. She got bad legal advice.

[Warpy]

145. It was a warning shot

Do you know what a warning shot is? It's when you shoot into an inanimate object away from people.

Do you know what a panic situation is? It's when your life is being threatened by someone much larger and out of control.

Once you learn these two things, you'll be qualified to continue this discussion. Until then, I'm afraid you're unequal to the task.

Again, this woman got 20 years for NOT shooting her husband. Some men would put her away for the rest of her life for daring to touch a gun in the presence of a man.

And if you gave a shit about her kids, you'd want them to have their mother.

We're done here.

[hack89]

147. Warning shots are illegal and a crime in most states.

Shooting blindly and not knowing where the bullet will land is also a crime in most state.

She shot into the ceiling in a confined room over the heads of her ex and kids. Is that something you really want to defend?

Any trained gun owner will tell you that warning shots will get you into big trouble.

[RosieS57]

25. I wouldn't..

....turn my back on a man who had had his hands around my throat earlier in the confrontation.That is suicidal. How do you open the door, as a woman, without having your back to the garage itself?

Regards from Rosie

[hack89]

28. Then she should stayed there and waited. She was safe.

time to calm down and think what to do. Time for her ex to calm down. Time to talk to her ex.

She grabbed a gun and went back into the house. She did not need to do that.

[WillyT]

32. No... What She Should Have Done, Was Shot Him Dead And Claimed "Stand Your Ground"... Right ???

Would have get less, or no time.

[hack89]

36. Except there were witnesses. nt

[vanlassie]

43. And apparently you were one of them.

[hack89]

54. No. She testified she went into the garage

she testified she got her gun out of her car. She testified she went back into the house.

That is why it is not self defense in the eyes of the law.

[vanlassie]

65. Oh, so you weren't there? Have you

been an abused spouse? Or maybe what you want us all to know about you is that YOU possess all of the wisdom one would need to decide this case ALL BY YOURSELF! You have the law DOWN!

How. Very. Special. You. Are.

[hack89]

67. What about the jury?

they saw all the evidence and heard all the testimony. It took 12 minutes for them to declare her guilty.

Nice rant by the way - unfortunately the legal system depends on evidence and the letter of the law, not emotion. I am not special - I just understand why she was judged guilty.

[vanlassie]

69. Write the appeals court.

[hack89]

72. I suspect the result will be the same. nt

[shawn703]

39. Ridiculous

She was not "safe". If someone assaulted me in my home, even if I had a gun I wouldn't feel safe until the threat was removed from the home. Maybe she was afraid he was going to get his own gun, and maybe she knew he was quicker and more accurate with his than she was with hers. So feel safe knowing that if he gets to his gun and enters the garage it could mean your ass? Yeah, okay.

[hack89]

58. The law doesn't see it that way unfortunately.

warning shots are not legal in most states - in many they are considered assault.

[noiretextatique]

140. what an absurd assertion

If she knew how to open the door manually...a BIG IF...she may not have thought to do that in a panic. is your problem?

[Blue_Tires]

143. Forget it; he's rolling

Just for laughs, go search some of his legal "interpretations" in the Martin threads...A few of the usual DU suspects have gone full circle with their arguments, hoping no one would notice...

[noiretextatique]

171. i remember all if them

including this one

[hack89]

175. Does that explain why she shot in the direction of the kids? Because she was panicked?

She sounds like the kind of person we should prevent from getting concealed carry permits - she was clearly a danger to all around her.

[cheapdate]

44. Did George Zimmerman create an avoidable confrontation? Just curious.

[hack89]

55. Yes. Just like him that CCW led to a poor choice. nt

[cheapdate]

164. I agree. Thank you for you answer.

[dkf]

134. Yes, and that is not the standard as we've seen.

At the moment, did the defendant have a reasonable fear? That's all that matters. And having a gun opens one to the risk of having it taken away, it isn't necessarily an all powerful thing to pull it out.

Honestly where is the consistency?

[dkf]

133. From what I've seen self defense works for assault.

So maybe it was an assault, but was it justified due to fear of death or bodily harm?

Frankly I supported Zimmerman's acquittal because I thought declaring him guilty would have a harmful effect on a woman's ability to protect herself. Marisa Alexander's case is exactly the type of case I was thinking of.

It is only fair, more than fair in fact, that she be acquitted.

[Igel]

66. She didn't aim at the ceiling.

She hit the wall. The shot ricocheted.

Of course, she could have just followed the terms of the restraining order and not entered the man's house without permission. She had no "ground" to stand. She was in another's castle.

[RosieS57]

68. Except...

....that she was the one who had the restraining order on him. She was getting her clothes from that house, not knowing he was there.

She does need to do time. She has done time for this crime. 20 years is way excessive.

No one died. People get let go with a slap on the wrist after actually killing a person.

The new trial is due to the capriciousness of the justice system in Florida.

Regards from Rosie

[lumberjack_jeff]

75. He wasn't there that night.

She left her 8 day old baby at the hospital and spent the night in his house. He returned home with his two kids the following morning, finding her still there.

Must have been a lot of clothes.

The two "had a pleasant breakfast" followed by an argument. She went to the garage in which she'd parked her car for the night, retrieved a gun and shot at him. He and the kids fled and called 911.

She claimed self-defense and stand your ground.
a) it's not "self-defense" when you leave an argument and come back with a gun.
b) it's not "stand your ground" when you leave it to get weapons.

She should do jail time and never again have the right to own weapons.

Is 20 years too much? Maybe.

[lumberjack_jeff]

77. She did point the gun at him. The bullet hit the wall and ricocheted into the ceiling. See post 74.

[heaven05]

51. oh please

[Niceguy1]

61. and she wasn't suppsed to be there in the first place.

Even her own childern testified against her.

She doea need to do time

[Blue_Tires]

110. It's funny to see this from you, given how much water you carried for Zimmerman...

[hack89]

115. And I find it funny that all those that condemned Florida's concealed carry laws

are silent on Marissa Alexander having one.

I always said that Z was guilty of manslaughter. I also knew that the state had a very weak case because there were no eye witnesses.

[Blue_Tires]

120. And I've always said countless people have been convicted

on MUCH weaker cases than what Florida had against Zimmerman, so that dog won't hunt, no matter how many times you repeat it...Race is the reason why Zimmerman walked free after committing murder, race is the reason why so many DUers keep trying to justify it as a legally sound verdict, and race is the reason why the NRA and all the hardcore gunners on DU and elsewhere aren't defending Alexander to the death...Where's HER website and defense fund? I'd have more respect for the hardcore gunners if there was the slightest bit of consistency...

So why is one of these cases OK with you and not the other? You've put up a stronger argument against Alexander in ONE thread than I've seen against Zimmerman in 16 months of threads....

[hack89]

121. I argued the law in both cases.

not what the law should be but what the law actually says.


Stripped of the emotion and the hyperbole the law is pretty straightforward and the results of both trials were easy to predict.

In Alexander's case, leaving the scene of the confrontation, getting a gun and returning to confront her ex would not be considered self defense in any state in the union.

[Blue_Tires]

123. The law may be mostly "straightforward", but it is open to interpretation..

Not to mention the fact that it sure as hell isn't blind or immune to biases...

"I argued the law in both cases" -- Did I miss something earlier, or did you say you're an attorney?? So it's just happenchance that your "interpretations" are going against black folks? It's just happenchance that whenever some irrelevant bullshit about Trayvon Martin came up in the news (his text messages, toxicology report, etc.), you were usually one of the FIRST to post it??

And that doesn't answer my real question -- Why did the gunners from coast to coast consider Zimmerman to be some cause célèbre "Jesus on the cross" while being dead silent on this case??

[hack89]

124. Give it a break - you are trying too hard.

you don't like guns and gun owners - I get it.

[Blue_Tires]

125. Wrong again...I just like black folks to get equal, consistent justice

something I'd long assumed was a given on a liberal message board...If you think I'm a gun banner or something you know me a lot less than I thought you did...

But I get it, the truth hurts and people get touchy on this board when the hypocrisy mirror gets pointed in their direction (I'm not immune to this, either...) so I'll give you a brief respite...

[hack89]

131. It is crystal clear what kind of person you are.

and thanks for your magnanimous generosity towards me. You truly are a special person several cuts above the average poster here.

[Blue_Tires]

137. Hate on me all you wish if it helps your catharsis...

I'm just some no-name nut behind a keyboard who's DU-ing when he should be working...A nut you have never met, nor will ever meet...

But if nothing else, I implore you to find a few real-life African-Americans in your neighborhood, workplace, or whatever to become friendly with...Talk to us...Ask some of us directly why concepts like the Alexander+Zimmerman verdicts, racial profiling, wide disparities with how the justice system treats us versus other ethnicities, etc., tend to upset us...What you hear might just open your worldview a bit wider...

[hack89]

142. Hate? Too powerful an emotion to waste on an anonymous internet opponent

bemusement is a more accurate feeling. I come specifically for tough, hard edged debate - you give me what I want so why should I be upset?

I spent 20 years in the Navy after growing up as an Army brat. I have lived in an integrated environment my entire life - I have lived with, went to school with, and worked with African Americans for 50 years.

You are spinning quite a tapestry from a single, thin thread - quite a remarkable skill consider you have never met me and are judging me purely for my views on two court cases.

[Blue_Tires]

148. So what are you judging me on, then??

Since the only thing we have on each other is posting history...In #131 you claim it's crystal clear what kind of person I am...Even I'm not bold enough to ascertain what kind you are...I'm just interested in the inconsistency of such a sizable chunk of the general gun-owning community (many of whom I know in real life living in Va., which is full of gun owners + active/retired military) defending Zimmerman from day one (including financially) while remaining notably silent on this?

And I'm genuinely curious: These African-Americans you live and work with...What have they said when you broached the subject of these cases with them? Or is it something you only feel comfortable discussing in anonymity?

Finally, I wish to ask a small pardon...95% of the time you're patient and even-handed with me, and I have a bad habit of pissing on it...The Zimmerman verdict has put a rage into me that I'll probably carry around for years to come, and I've occasionally let that rage spill out at inappropriate times, which has burned bridges with a number of posters...I appreciate your understanding...

[hack89]

149. That was a snarky comment on your willingness to judge me

perhaps we need a snark smilie.

Don't worry - I took no offense.

[The Wizard]

2. Her mistake was to

stay in Florida and expect justice.

[cui bono]

7. Yup. LIFWB or LIFWAF

Living in Florida While Black

Living in Florida While African-American

[Blue_Tires]

130. But evidently we're *never* supposed to point that out...

Since the law is the law and completely 100% infallible...

[freshwest]

3. Glad to see it. Let's work for more 'equality under the law.' What's been going there is an affront.

[Judi Lynn]

22. So glad she will get another hearing.

Without a doubt she would never have had this chance without the shame gathering around the prosecutors after the murder of Trayvon Martin.

Let's home the jury will give a little more thought to this case than the one which deliberated for 12 minutes before stampeding back to deliver their "guilty" verdict.

Hope she won't be railroaded this time.

Thank you, Rosie.

[RosieS57]

26. Wow!

Thank YOU, Judi Lynn. Civility, what a concept!

Regards from Rosie

[Judi Lynn]

97. Forgot to mention, welcome to D.U., Rosie.

Very glad to see you're posting here.

[RosieS57]

106. TYVM

I appreciate your warm welcome!

Regards from Rosie

[Tumbulu]

79. I'm with you- well said!

Oh this case makes my blood boil and the idiotic comments above by all the poor men who somehow feel they have to defend the creep of a man who was spared being shot.....good grief! We're we they when he was hurting her?

[Judi Lynn]

96. The comments do say more about the writers than they realize. That's deep hostility

either toward women, or black people, or both.

It appears they get a little wild internally even imagining any woman standing up to a man, even WHEN he has proven he is brutal and well-inclined to really hurt her badly.

I can't imagine anyone would want to reveal they have this kind of deep-seated hatred churning away in them, ready to fly out over the news another woman has had to take desperate measures to keep from being beaten wildly or even killed.

Sickening. Defective spirits, no doubt whatsoever.

[Tumbulu]

168. Tes, so very revealing and so very sad

my goodness, what a long way we still have to go on these issues.

[Gothmog]

30. This is good news

Compared to the treatment given to Zimmerman, it was wrong for her to be in prison

[FreedRadical]

33. This is the kind of discussion thread

that makes it so hard for me to post on DU. The idea that I would have my human experience debated as if if if...

This woman should have had our blessing to shoot the fucker between to eyes. WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENS TO WOMEN. Murder, Rape, A thousand forms of assault.

Then we set back, wring our hand about something needing to be done. Not protect them. Then debate it. What about her children. Even if she gets out, she still has the shit stew of child court to deal with. And if the children are still with the father, her life is still in danger.

I give no one permission to debate my experience. The feeling I am having for this woman right now is, had it been me in her place, I would be in prison going " fine fuckers, give me 20. I will protect myself if you will not". I'm hear ain't? And I should have shot him between the eye's!

But that's how I saw my mom do it. Raise 5 children. Buy a house in the early 70's with those 5 children in tow. And not take shit in this America.

Thank you Mom a strong black woman

[RosieS57]

42. You are right, of course

And I didn't mean to upset you by starting this thread.

I gett as deeply perturbed over a white Hispanic was just defending himself but an abused black women is convicted.

I really love living here in Florida, been here for decades, and it is so difficult living with an unjust court system.

It really is not paranoia if a corrupt judicial system is out to get you, is it?

Again, I apologize if I offended you.

Regards from Rosie

[FreedRadical]

47. Your OP is fine

I guess even the debate is fine. This stuff needs to see the light of day. I just can't do it.

[Tumbulu]

80. The idiots who defend the jerk of a man

Are what drive me crazy. This woman should have been given a medal, and yes, if the kids are with him....why do abusive men get custody of children???!!!!!!!

[BainsBane]

87. They defend him

because they believe a man is within his rights to beat women without her defending herself or having the law interfere. These are the same men who invade every thread on violence against women and to insist we have no right to discuss such matters in public. They are transparent about exactly what their motives are in this whole discussion.

[lumberjack_jeff]

90. Or perhaps "they" think that aggravated assault should be discouraged. n/t

[BainsBane]

91. Why not the assault of the woman?

You're actively defending a man who has admitted to beating her and other women. It's okay to beat the crap out of her, but for her to fire a shot in the ceiling is outrageous. No one is surprised to see your position here. Some things are constant.

Also the fact the man perjured himself, but naturally you will believe someone who gets his kicks out of beating up women over a woman who had the audacity to actually survive that battery.

[lumberjack_jeff]

108. On the contrary. I'm largely alone in this thread in NOT excusing and defending domestic assault.

After she was arrested for shooting at him, and while out on bail, she met with him to coordinate their testimony. Later, while still out on bail, she went to his house hoping to spend the night. When he refused, she beat him up. The police were called and she was arrested and then convicted.

Furthermore, Alexander’s fear seems to have evaporated rather quickly. After convincing her husband to lie in his deposition, Alexander returned to Gray’s house while out on bail in December 2010. According to the incident report drafted by the Jacksonville sheriff’s office, when Gray refused to let her stay the night, an argument broke out. Police arrived to find Gray’s left eye swollen and bloodied. Alexander had fled. In March 2012, she pled no contest to domestic-battery charges.

[Tumbulu]

169. He should have been in jail already, why has he not been in jail for 20 years for assault

if that is what is standard for assault. Oh when a man beats a woman up, he gets released after sleeping it off in a jail cell AT THE MOST. But any woman who stands up for herself, is jailed for decades if not life. Honestly, the only solution for these kind of men is permanent incarceration.

[Judi Lynn]

98. Tremendous post, FreedRadical. Thanks for saying it so well. n/t

[noiretextatique]

141. thank you...this is some sick american bullshit

she fires a warning shot at an abusive asshole she deserves a medal

[NealK]

40. K&R

This whole thing is crazy.

[RC]

41. My personal opinion is that Ms. Alexander

be set free, with punishment already suffered. At worst, only facing a period of probation.

If she could not get the garage door open, she would be trapped in that garage, reason enough to leave it. If she was or even felt trapped, that alone is reason enough to leave for elsewhere, gun or no gun.

[cheapdate]

48. I don't know anything about this incident, but

if that man has ever threatened or abused that woman, or ANY woman before, in all of his adult life then HE should be in jail, in the hospital, or in the ground and she should be allowed to get on with her life.

[Tumbulu]

81. I agree! Nt

[SleeplessinSoCal]

49. About time. Very pleased to hear it.

There's so much going on, I'd forgot about her.

[heaven05]

50. good! now on to don siegelman

let's get him a new trial. he deserves it.

[JonLP24]

63. Thank god

There was so many defending this when she was sentenced, it made no sense.

[indepat]

70. Just how fucked up is a 20-year sentence for discharging a gun when no one gets hurt? Imagine,

spending +/- $1,000,000 to warehouse someone for an action hurting no one, but in which the sentence might do untold harm to her children, notwithstanding ruining the life of the convicted. And the same State had absolutely no problem with an adult packing heat fatally shooting an unarmed child who had been minding his own business. Just how sick, perverted, and fucked up are these travesties?

[RosieS57]

71. It is some.....

.....scary shyte trying to live one's life in this state.

Regards from Rosie

[indepat]

73. Never will I again go to FL

[Ash_F]

111. Really...are the kids supposed to stay with her abusive husband?

Last edited Fri Sep 27, 2013, 03:38 PM - Edit history (1)

In their zeal to "get those black people" they have no limit to how far they would go and have not one iota of shame about it.

[Blue_Tires]

132. Just as fucked up as the former George Zimmerman defense brigade

saying with a straight face that this sentence is deserved...

[lumberjack_jeff]

74. a) it wasn't a warning shot, it was at the heads of her husband and his children.

b) "stand your ground" doesn't mean leave to go get a gun then return to said ground.

On the evening of July 31st, She left her 1 week old baby at the hospital and went to Gray's house (violating a protective order) to get stuff. She spent the night at the house. When Gray arrived home the following morning with his kids (9 and 13) they had "a pleasant breakfast together".

At that point she showed him cellphone photos of his baby and, inadvertently, text messages from her ex-husband. The two argued, she went into the garage in which she had parked her car, retrieved her handgun, came back into the house, aimed it at Gray and his kids and fired. The shot hit the wall "nearly missing (Gray's) head" and ricocheted into the ceiling.

Gray and the kids fled out the front door, into the street and called 911.

Here's the 911 call.

And that evidence was more than sufficient for a Florida judge to promptly reject Alexander’s appeal to Florida’s Stand Your Ground law. As Legal Insurrection’s Andrew Branca explains, in the eyes of the law, two separate conflicts occurred on August 1, 2010: a “non-deadly conflict” that ended when Alexander went into the garage, and a “deadly” one that started when she returned with a gun. Stand Your Ground applies only to a “person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked.” Alexander began the latter confrontation, and she was the attacker. It was behavior “inconsistent with a person who is in genuine fear for his or her life,” to use the judge’s words.

Furthermore, Alexander’s fear seems to have evaporated rather quickly. After convincing her husband to lie in his deposition, Alexander returned to Gray’s house while out on bail in December 2010. According to the incident report drafted by the Jacksonville sheriff’s office, when Gray refused to let her stay the night, an argument broke out. Police arrived to find Gray’s left eye swollen and bloodied. Alexander had fled. In March 2012, she pled no contest to domestic-battery charges.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/354178/real-marissa-alexander-story-ian-tuttle/page/0/1

She is no innocent victim, and she has earned jail time.

20 years? I dunno, but if they let her go and she does it again, it's the court's fault.

[Tumbulu]

82. He had a history of abusing her

She should have killed him. Period, any man who has ever attacked a woman needs to be jailed for a long time and if that had happened ( this man put in jail) this would not have happened.

I am a little tired of reading you defending a man who admitted to beating up every girlfriend/ wife he ever had. As though beating a lover up is nothing, as though it does not create crazy making actions.

He has gotten off easy and he should be in jail for 20 years, not her.

[BainsBane]

86. That makes him a hero in the eyes of some

[lumberjack_jeff]

89. He's not on trial. She is.

Are you saying that;
parking the car in the garage of the person against whom she has a protective order
spending the night in his house
sharing breakfast with him and his children the following morning when he and his children arrive home
Then, when an argument ensues, go to the car, retrieve a gun, come back into the house and kill him
... is appropriate, understandable and excusable behavior?

I don't know why I'm asking really, because you just said that it is. I guess this is one of those questions that seem reasonable to say "are you sure you mean what you're saying?"

Should a person who would do this have guns... or for that matter children?

Crazy making actions are still actions for which people are responsible.

The court is retrying the case because the defense only needs to show a reasonable doubt that her shooting was in self defense. The facts of the case are not in dispute. She left the scene of the argument, went to the garage, to her car (which she parked the previous night and presumably knew how to work the garage door at that point) retrieved a gun and returned to the living room, shooting at him (not at the ceiling).

I find it implausible that the next verdict (but perhaps not the sentence) won't be the same as the previous one.

[BainsBane]

92. The facts of the case are in dispute

and you are repeating the account of the man who beat her multiple times. He has in fact admitted to beating all women, except one, he has had children with.

[Judi Lynn]

99. A look at his face in "images" tells anyone he is brutal. It's right there, in plain sight.

Boggles the mind he not only assaulted the one who took exception with it, but others, as well.

The one he didn't beat must have left before he got the chance. She was really lucky.

[Tumbulu]

166. I am saying that if he had been in jail for abuse in the first place

none of this would have happened.

In cases where men attack women, and in this case serially, the man should be in jail, permanently.

[BainsBane]

85. Her husband that had beaten the crap out of her on numerous occassions

And has admitted to beating multiple women.

[Ash_F]

112. a) This has not been sufficiently proven

b) It looks like a higher court agrees.

c) Don't encourage Florida

[Blue_Tires]

138. Her problem was calling it a "warning shot"

she should have said she was "Cleaning her gun when all of a sudden it (gasp!) went off!"

That excuse tends to get a lot of BOD mileage....

And did you really post a National Review link? Jesus H. Christ, son...

[kwassa]

165. You are quoting the National Review as a source? And you are a Democrat?

Apparently not.

[Tumbulu]

83. Best news of the day, thanks for posting Rose!

My goodness, this case outraged me! I want the jerk man charged for all the assaults that he made in his life. Had he been serving time for them, this would not have happened. But oh no, men are somehow entitled to harass and attack women, particularly if there has been a romantic involvement.

[RosieS57]

95. Thanks, Tumbalu

Yeah, a review of the facts is all over the airwaves.

She had given birth to his child only nine days before this incident.

He admitted hitting 4 of 5 of his children's mothers.

He changed his story on the stand at the last minute.

The fishy smell of this is overwhelming.

Thanks again, Tumbalu.


Regards from Rosie

[Judi Lynn]

126. Thanks for mentioning the fact she had given birth only a little over a week earlier. n/t

[BainsBane]

84. I am so relieved to learn this!

[blackspade]

88. I'm glad she's getting another chance to beat these bullshit charges.

[BainsBane]

93. Once again we see the determination to protect abusers

and silence women who dare to speak or act out against domestic violence. Ask yourselves who feels compelled to do something like that?

[JustAnotherGen]

101. Someone

Whose hands and face are dirty on some level.

[tammywammy]

104. She also pled no contest to domestic battery of him.

About four months after Alexander was released on bail, on orders to have no contact with Gray, she got into an altercation with him at his home that gave him a black eye, Corey said. Alexander was arrested and charged with battery, to which she pleaded no contest.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/26/marissa-alexander-new-trial_n_3995869.html

[Ash_F]

114. DUers? /nt

[hack89]

122. She was fortunate to live in a state where she would carry a gun in public and protect herself

could you imagine how bad it could have been if she was unarmed?

[Blue_Tires]

127. oh, so you want to defend her now??

or is it one of those "thank god for the law, but throw her ass in prison for 20 years anyway" -type of things?

[noiretextatique]

144. really sick shit

asshole can beat the shit out of you, but heaven forbid you defend yourself....as. a woman. meanwhile, an armed man can claim he was so afraid of an unarmed teenager that he had to use deadly force. racism and sexism are alive and well, and some use isms to trump common sense.

[BainsBane]

155. Astounding, isn't it?

[noiretextatique]

170. yep

and sickening. note that the very same people clamoring for her head also supported Zimmerman.

[Kurska]

107. Firing a "warning shot" in a wall is several magnitudes dumber than firing a warning shot at all.

No one in our society should be firing "warning shots", they are illegal for a reason. What goes up must come down and plenty of people are killed every year by idiots who fire their guns into the air. When you firing a "warning shot" into a wall all you do is make the process of your warning shot murdering the hell out of someone way more likely.

That said, 20 years seems rather harsh.

[dkf]

157. Should she have shot him instead?

[Kurska]

161. If she legitimately thought her life was in danger, then yes

Far better to shoot someone actually posing a threat to you, then to shoot some poor unrelated person in your attempt to warn another.

[dkf]

162. Personally I would prefer a warning shot if someone was moving on me.

But I guess I'll just have to aim for his heart if ever I get a gun and am in that position.

[JVS]

184. It seems shooting the gun is justified if and only if killing the target is justified.

Introducing the legal concept of warning shots would open a whole can of worms. Lots of attempted murderers would want their imprecise shooting to count as warning shots.

[Sunlei]

116. I hope she gets released. If she killed the abuser, she probably would have got the same 20 years.

[2banon]

163. Lost track of the stats on Women serving life time sentences ..

on convictions of First Degree Murder - the victim? Abusive Husbands/boyfriends. By abuse, I'm not referring to verbal abuse.

I recall PBS News Hour did a special investigation on the subject some years ago, I think it was way back in the mid to late 90's. Can't remember now.

And I don't recall the actual statistics, but I remember they were staggering in terms of the number of women incarcerated, serving life sentences, essentially for self defense.

It would be an interesting research project if only to update from 20 or so years ago. Perhaps it's been done, but given little attention.

Essentially, it was quite an indictment on the Judicial system, not only wrt to Race/People of Color in general, but to Women as well.

Seems to me, this case is yet one more to the statistics.

[Tumbulu]

167. sickening and clearly not improved

why are men allowed to beat/attack women and get no time for it, but a woman who defends herself gets life in prison........hmmm why?

Unbelievably sad and frustrating. And then there are the DU fools who are defending the jerk.

[Tx4obama]

172. Kick :) n/t

[Paladin]

187. I want to invite our resident Gun Enthusiasts who are so unhappy about this new trial....

...to go fuck themselves. Hard, and at great length. Thanks for your best efforts.