It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by GrantedBail
He was the one that formed the neighborhood watch in his complex.
Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by Grimpachi
Good, that is going to pi@@ the jury off. She clearly is uneducated, does not have command of the English language and has some type of learning disability. Remember there are 6 woman jurors, most of which I would imagine are mothers. They are not going to take too kindly to insulting this young woman. It is gonna go over just as well as his knock knock joke.
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Plain stupid isn't really a disability.
Florida law is specific on this point. Immunity is immediate and real.
You need to look at two statutes to get the whole sense:
776.013(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity, and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
And directly to immunity:
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
Florida law gives true immunity and not just an affirmative defense. It actually criminalizes the arrest of someone who claims self-defense unless there is probable cause he broke the law. That is a high standard considering this is just for an arrest – most jurisdictions would arrest and let the ADA sort it all out. The law also means indictments are harder to get and easier to get out of
Link
Originally posted by GrantedBail
Again, wrong information. Cursive is taught in grade school. To suggest otherwise is just freakin ridiculous.
Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by dudeman351
Your avoiding my question dudeman and resorting to name calling and insults. Let's keep the discussion about the case. So again, I ask, where have a misinterpreted ANY facts. You have a whole body of work to chose from.