FL Mom gets 20 years for warning shots - Zimmerman Walks...

reply to post by TinkerHaus


In both cases, the outcome was correct.
The woman broke the law and had a restraining order which she broke. She should be arrested.
In the Zimmerman case ... the prosecution totally failed in proving it's case.

reply to post by FlyersFan


That prosecutor could lose a parking ticket case written on the front steps of city hall itself. :shk:

OJ Simpson had Marsha Clark and Zimmerman had this crew of mental midgets. We saw both cases go to hell in a hand basket (One mad for major miscarriage of justice..the other should have lost anyway, respectively) with all possible speed because a prosecutor was woefully out of their depth and ability while being assigned a case of political basis for the feel good factor.

Well... I hope it 'felt good' to see the case blown to pieces and lost like a record holder.

Apparently the prosecutor for this mad-woman breaking the restraining order had at least some professional ability to manage a basic case without blowing it.

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by TinkerHaus

 

There's something very wrong with that news article. No judge is going to hand down a 20 year prison sentence to a woman with no criminal record that only fired warning shots.

Just found this, which makes a lot more sense:

Florida Times-Union

edit on 7/14/2013 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)

Grey said he lied during an initial deposition when he said he had been the aggressor because the couple had settled their differences and gotten back together.

This is pretty fishy.

"Oh I know I admitted to violence before but uh... I was... lying... cause I'm really such a nice guy". It's a huge red flag that he is changing his story as circumstances dictate. Clearly, he is going to say what is going to make him come out the least dirty. Sorry, not buying his story. It takes two to tango, I get that; but the clarity of his "victim" status here is highly questionable.

And THIS may have something to do with why... Ever bother reading the other side of the story?

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by ThreeBears

 

There were restraining orders on both. She left, got a gun, came back and shot at him. There was no evidence she was in danger that day, and she shot towards her son who was standing near his father. I suppose all that was his fault too right? Because only men are dangerous and women are always victims, right?

Again, court testimony says she shot upward, and never aimed the firearm at a person.

The prosecution claims otherwise, but ALL testimony says this is the case. Even the husband admits this.

But, this thread isn't about the nitty gritty details of the case. The point is no one was harmed and she gets 20 years. Zimmerman stalks and KILLS a minor, and he walks.

Can we please talk about the glaring inconsistencies of these two cases?

reply to post by TinkerHaus


That IS relevant to the disparity. Zimmerman was able to show doubt, and that he may have actually been defending himself. She tried to use the same law, claiming she was in fear of her life, but by leaving and going back, she proved that she was able to get away from him, and wasn't afraid for her life.

Under Florida law, there was no choice in the matter. Florida passed a 10, 20, life law where if you brandish a gun and are convicted, it's an automatic 10 year sentence. If you fire a shot, it's 20 years, and if anyone dies, it's life. The judge said that she probably didn't deserve 20 years, but there was no choice under the law, which he had to follow.

reply to post by redhorse


The judge had nothing to do with it, his hands were tied. It's a Florida law that since she fired a gun, whether she hit anyone or not, that she had to be sentenced to 20 years.

reply to post by TinkerHaus


I read about this not but a few hours ago.

First thing, for those of you who carry, you need to keep one thing in mind, DO NOT FIRE WARNING SHOTS!

If you pull that weapon out, and your are truly fearing for your life, kill the perpetrator. Empty the magazine. Don't fire warning shots.

Warning shots are reckless. And WILL land you in jail.

That said, the 20 yr sentence against this woman is wrong. At least on the surface. I want far more details than the CBS article was able to provide.

reply to post by projectvxn

On Aug. 1, 2010, a fight between Alexander and her husband, Rico Gray, 36, left her cornered in the couple's home. She fled into the garage to escape but was trapped behind a jammed door, she stated in court documents. She said she grabbed the gun she kept in the garage, returned to the house and, when Gray threatened to kill her, fired a single shot to ward him off.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

That's where the problem comes in. She left, and went back into the house, where she wasn't supposed to be anyway. If she had wanted to get her things, she could have called the police and asked them to go with her to the house. Police in many states have done that in the past, to keep things like this from happening.

A 20 year sentence for discharging a firearm is ridiculous.

Owning a gun is a constitutional right.
Driving an automobile is a state regulated privileged.
Florida sends you to jail for two decades for firing that gun.
The same state fines you $1200 for a DUI offense.

Guns can kill.
Drunk driving kills.

Modern bureaucracy is a form of petty tyranny where a mindless, twitching reactionary process creates laws and common sense is held at undisclosed locations.

reply to post by Zaphod58


So the OP seems to be making a comparison that simply isn't there based on the facts of the case. Sorry OP, while I feel for the woman, the two instances are not the same.

The law was not followed in this case and the judge made the call based on the law he had to follow.

That said, this calls into question mandatory minimum laws.

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas


i agree yes warning shots are not legal unless you a coast guard vessel or navy ship at sea. why do you never see cops shoot to disarm they are told to go for kill shots for a reason.

Originally posted by projectvxn
That said, this calls into question mandatory minimum laws.

That's exactly what a lot of people are saying is the problem. She shouldn't have gotten 20 years based on her previous record, and the circumstances of the crime, but there was no leeway for the judge to give her anything but. When she turned down the plea bargain, she set herself up for 20 years. The judge said that she probably didn't deserve the full sentence, but under the law, he had no choice.

Once, Once you get the Facts Right and ALL the Facts..
Yuppp, she gets 20... Period

If she was a police officer she would've gotten a promotion.

reply to post by TinkerHaus


I am not American but have followed this case on the news with some disgust.

I am a white male though I have some Jew in me just like Zimmerman and the Judge, I am also part Maori and mainly a blend English, Irish, scot, and welsh so I am basically a Brit.

Sorry but in my opinion Zimmerman should be retried in a federal court and he should face murder charges, he stalked that innocent young lad and he killed him like a dog, Money talks doesn't it.

Originally posted by Miracula

There is no such thing as a warning shot. It's illegal for police to fire warning shots. We weren't allowed to fire warning shots as boarding team members in the Coast Guard. You either need to use lethal force or you don't, not warning shots.

I realise you specifically mentioned boarding teams but i thought the CG was still allowed to an artillery shot across the bow of another boat. Is that not the case?

reply to post by TinkerHaus
It's obvious a stand your ground law doesn't apply here at all. She has three prior offenses, which clearly makes her a liability, and doesn't own a concealed weapons license (which usually infers one to have some sort of safety gun class).

Further more, if you're going to make a thread where you would like to hear feedback.. try being a little less rude in your responses. I'm surprised your thread didn't die out on page 1 with the way you are talking to some members.. we're on here too, we're not idiots and your not the Steven Hawking of ATS.

31b

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by TinkerHaus

 

There's something very wrong with that news article. No judge is going to hand down a 20 year prison sentence to a woman with no criminal record that only fired warning shots.

Just found this, which makes a lot more sense:

Florida Times-Union

edit on 7/14/2013 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)

Go back and Read that article...says RIGHT HERE

"Gray has been arrested twice in Duval County on domestic abuse charges, one resulting in a conviction and a sentence of probation. Alexander also had filed an injunction for protection against Gray."


Read more at Jacksonville.com: jacksonville.com...

Doesn't say Anywhere that Ms Alexandria had any record of Domestic violence or arrests, BUT HE HE HE HE HE

DID. TWO

And NOT just by HER, by TWO OTHER WOMEN.

So he Says that he LIED the first time, yea Right. Come on...here is a man WITH a Domestic Violence HISTORY of OTHER WOMEN NOT JUST HER

And then he Confesses then After the fact Changes his story,

Sure, believable, more like SPIN.

HIS DV RECORD ALONE IS GROUNDS FOR REASONABLE DOUBT, PERIOD.

She's not the Only FEMALE in jail for SELF DEFENCE, this is typical gender bias, under patriarchy, where women are considered Property and if a man is abusive no big deal....WOMEN DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO LIFE,

Period. That's the problem. The FACT that domestic violence KILLS more women in THIS nation, says it all. Fact is,

If she would have been beaten to death, there would have only been a snippet in the paper IF that and HE would have served, MAYBE, two years. FACT.

Because society SANCTIONS it. She was good as dead anyway, whether she fought back or not...FACT MOST WOMEN ARE MURDERED BY PARTNERS WHEN THEY LEAVE.

All I see here is a lot of Cheerleading for MISOGYNY women hating, which IS the problem, and WHY this woman sits in jail for twenty years while HE will more than likely

ABUSE ANOTHER WOMAN WITH IMPUNITY AND BLESSING BY FELLOW ABUSERS.

reply to post by ThreeBears


She LEFT THE HOUSE to get a gun, then fired a bullet at "adult height" into a room with him and two children in it! How is that NOT a crime?! She fired THROUGH A WALL! That bullet could have easily ricocheted into one of the children and killed them!

But you're right, women are always the victims (despite the fact that while out on bail she went BACK to his house, again when she wasn't supposed to, and beat the crap out of him). The physical evidence in this case proves that it was not a warning shot. You don't fire a warning shot at head height through a wall into a room where the person you're shooting at is.

“He was either prosecuted for that and there were restraining orders about that.” She emphasizes that both parties took out restraining orders against each other, and she adds, “that only becomes relevant as to whether he was endangering her at that moment.”

Corey says Alexander had no injuries consistent with abuse on that day. She said if she had, they would have been visible in her booking photo, or in the booking admission report when she was taken to the Duval County jail, “and that’s after the SWAT team had to respond to the house to get her to come outside.”

thegrio.com...:angela-corey-4x3-jpg

For the record, my fiancee is on HIS side, and she's a woman. So don't tell me anyone defending him is a woman hater or misogynist.