So Zimmerman is charged with 2nd degree murder.

[Goose]

[CJ]

How the hell do either one of those have anything in common? Zimmerman was denied stand your ground law as well. He's being tried for murder, and he hasn't even had his trial yet? Whoever made that image is a damn moron.

[KBScobravert]

First rule of stand your ground is no warning shots. She should have went center mass and taken her chances like the rest of us.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[KBScobravert]

Besides, where is her name so the random picture of a stista can be validated? ?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[sspstang]

First rule of stand your ground is no warning shots. She should have went center mass and taken her chances like the rest of us.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

Yep

[CJ]

Ignorance is spread by lack of knowledge. If you had any comprehension of the law you would never have posted that image. That's the real tragedy with this whole situation. No one on Trayvon's side understands what the hell is going on.

[DON SVO]

LMFAO @ "warning shots"

Possibly poor aim later construed as 'warning shots' by a shitty Defense Atty?

[347Mike]

How the hell do either one of those have anything in common? Zimmerman was denied stand your ground law as well. He's being tried for murder, and he hasn't even had his trial yet? Whoever made that image is a damn moron.

I am going to go out on the limb here and say it is racially motivated and they are trying to illustrate how the system is fair. They both had "similar scenarios" but the white man isn't guilty (even though its still in progress) and the black woman was found guilty.

Derp... I agree, damn moron.

[SMEGMA STENCH]

LMFAO @ "warning shots"

Possibly poor aim later construed as 'warning shots' by a shitty Defense Atty?

Ya lol

[ceyko]

Does anyone know who the woman is on the right? I have no idea, I'd be interested in reading more about it. Admittedly, I know this will just piss me off more - but I'm ignorant to her circumstances as of now.

[blownragtop]

A Florida mother of three fired a warning shot at her husband after an argument escalated. According to a sworn deposition, Marissa Alexander’s husband Rico Gray got belligerent after he found text messages to her ex. “The two were already estranged – according to her father, Alexander had been living at her mother’s since the birth of the couple’s daughter nine days earlier, and Gray, a long-haul trucker, said he spent the night before in his tractor-trailer. Gray began calling her names, saying “If I can’t have you, nobody going to have you,” and blocking her from exiting the bathroom.” That’s when things got sticky . . .



Alexander managed to get past Gray and retrieved a gun from her car. From cbsnews.com:

“Gray told prosecutors in the deposition that Alexander came back into the house holding the weapon and told him to leave. He refused, and what happened next is somewhat unclear. In his deposition, Gray said “she shot in the air one time,” prompting him and the children to run out the front door. But when Gray called 911 the day of the incident, he said “she aimed the gun at us and she shot.””

Gray has a history of violence with Alexander. But a judge rejected her attorney’s request for immunity under Florida’s stand your ground law.


According to the judge’s order, “there is insufficient evidence that the Defendant reasonably believed deadly force was needed to prevent death or great bodily harm to herself,” and that the fact that she came back into the home, instead of leaving out the front or back door “is inconsistent with a person who is in genuine fear for her life.”

Alexander’s case was prosecuted by Angela Corey, the Florida State’s Attorney who is also prosecuting George Zimmerman. Alexander was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and because she discharged a firearm during the incident, the case fell under Florida’s “10-20-life” law, enacted in 1999, which mandates a 20-year sentence for use of a gun during the commission of certain crimes.

Corey, who ran on a platform of getting tough on “gun crime” offered a 3-year plea bargain for Alexander pleading guilty to aggravated assault. Alexander refused that deal. Corey asserts that Alexander shot out of anger, not fear, and in so doing endangered others in the house and committed a gun crime.

Another wrinkle in this case is Florida’s mandatory sentencing laws. Neither the judge nor the jury saw the incident as self defense, so the conviction carried with it a minimum 20 year sentence.


“You can’t shoot a gun at people,” says Corey. “It ricocheted from the wall to the ceiling, but what if it had hit someone?”

Alexander’s case is bringing scrutiny to mandatory minimum sentences, which Stone says “take discretion out of judges’ hands” and essentially hand that power to prosecutors, who already decide which charges to bring. Corey, for example, could have charged Alexander with straight aggravated assault, instead of adding the gun charge, but she told Crimesider that once Alexander rejected the plea deal, she felt it was her duty to charge according to the law.

As Corey put it, “She discharged a gun to kill them, and she has to answer for that.”

link

[Chopped54]

Whoever made that image is a damn moron.

Pretty much sums it up....

[Machx2]

But it's just marijuana, and if he is under the influence of it, that means an attorney can argue the probability of him being the aggressor is highly unlikely. It's not coke or meth or speed or PCP. The shooter must have engaged the dead kid who was doing nothing but minding his own business. I don't recall any one individual stating the dead kid was a complete angel.
It's a slippery slope if the prosecution decides to use it as a character flaw.

What? Apparently you have never been to court when someone is introduced as being a marijuana user. I can tell you, the words aren't "he was high, so your honor, there is no way he could have beat that man, everyone knows marijuana calms everyone down and doesn't make them aggressive. Here, ask J, my dealer."


In general, after using marijuana a person experiences a sedating effect, which makes the drug less likely to cause violence in users than other substances such as alcohol and stimulants (e.g., amphetamines and cocaine).

However, sometimes when marijuana is used it can cause fear, anxiety, panic or paranoia, which can result in an aggressive outburst. For most people, however, once the effects of the drug wear off, their behaviour gradually improves.

Studies show that violence can occur more often among people who use marijuana regularly, rather than those who use it occasionally or not at all. It is unclear why this is the case, but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana. marijuana is also part of the illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions.

Research also shows that marijuana users who commit violent acts usually have a history of violence before they start using the drug.

In addition, when people are withdrawing from marijuana they can be irritable, which can lead to abusive or aggressive behaviour.

Why do people become abusive or aggressive?

Using marijuana can produce strange behaviour and reactions in people when they are intoxicated. These reactions can be similar to psychosis and paranoia and because of this, marijuana users may experience the following:
•confusion – they misunderstand what is going on or what someone has said or done
•feeling threatened or frightened
•paranoia – they hear voices or think that people are out to get them

http://adai.washington.edu/marijuana/factsheets/aggression.htm

[juiceweezl]

A Florida mother of three fired a warning shot at her husband after an argument escalated. According to a sworn deposition, Marissa Alexander’s husband Rico Gray got belligerent after he found text messages to her ex. “The two were already estranged – according to her father, Alexander had been living at her mother’s since the birth of the couple’s daughter nine days earlier, and Gray, a long-haul trucker, said he spent the night before in his tractor-trailer. Gray began calling her names, saying “If I can’t have you, nobody going to have you,” and blocking her from exiting the bathroom.” That’s when things got sticky . . .



Alexander managed to get past Gray and retrieved a gun from her car. From cbsnews.com:

“Gray told prosecutors in the deposition that Alexander came back into the house holding the weapon and told him to leave. He refused, and what happened next is somewhat unclear. In his deposition, Gray said “she shot in the air one time,” prompting him and the children to run out the front door. But when Gray called 911 the day of the incident, he said “she aimed the gun at us and she shot.””

Gray has a history of violence with Alexander. But a judge rejected her attorney’s request for immunity under Florida’s stand your ground law.


According to the judge’s order, “there is insufficient evidence that the Defendant reasonably believed deadly force was needed to prevent death or great bodily harm to herself,” and that the fact that she came back into the home, instead of leaving out the front or back door “is inconsistent with a person who is in genuine fear for her life.”

Alexander’s case was prosecuted by Angela Corey, the Florida State’s Attorney who is also prosecuting George Zimmerman. Alexander was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and because she discharged a firearm during the incident, the case fell under Florida’s “10-20-life” law, enacted in 1999, which mandates a 20-year sentence for use of a gun during the commission of certain crimes.

Corey, who ran on a platform of getting tough on “gun crime” offered a 3-year plea bargain for Alexander pleading guilty to aggravated assault. Alexander refused that deal. Corey asserts that Alexander shot out of anger, not fear, and in so doing endangered others in the house and committed a gun crime.

Another wrinkle in this case is Florida’s mandatory sentencing laws. Neither the judge nor the jury saw the incident as self defense, so the conviction carried with it a minimum 20 year sentence.


“You can’t shoot a gun at people,” says Corey. “It ricocheted from the wall to the ceiling, but what if it had hit someone?”

Alexander’s case is bringing scrutiny to mandatory minimum sentences, which Stone says “take discretion out of judges’ hands” and essentially hand that power to prosecutors, who already decide which charges to bring. Corey, for example, could have charged Alexander with straight aggravated assault, instead of adding the gun charge, but she told Crimesider that once Alexander rejected the plea deal, she felt it was her duty to charge according to the law.

As Corey put it, “She discharged a gun to kill them, and she has to answer for that.”

link

I'd say that answers any questions about the 2 cases. She wasn't threatened according to the article which I'm guessing is based on court testimony. LOL at anyone trying to say the cases are similar.

[SS Junk]

What? Apparently you have never been to court when someone is introduced as being a marijuana user. I can tell you, the words aren't "he was high, so your honor, there is no way he could have beat that man, everyone knows marijuana calms everyone down and doesn't make them aggressive. Here, ask J, my dealer."

"However, sometimes when marijuana is used it can cause..."
Doesn't mean the dead kid was irritable or paranoid. He could have been "sedated." Like I said, if that is introduced as a character flaw or behavior issue it will be a slippery slope to get a jury convinced. Point being is if the dead kid is painted to be a "drug user" it will be tougher to prove his drug use was the cause of his alleged aggression.