fabsroman
Ultimate Member
That is correct. The burden of proof for the defense of self defense, is on the defendant. The audience is just different. Instead of it being the judge on a motion, it happens to be a jury at trial.
Retired police officer kills fellow movie-goer over texting dispute
- Thread starter Baccusboy
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
That is correct. The burden of proof for the defense of self defense, is on the defendant. The audience is just different. Instead of it being the judge on a motion, it happens to be a jury at trial.
- Aug 29, 2016
- 763
Only in Ohio. In the other states, including Florida, once you claim self-defense, the state has to disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
Iowa has a "duty to retreat" law, unless it changed, recently. If someone breaks into your home you are best off leaving, or heading toward the bedroom and shooting them there, if they follow. That is what I have been told.
We have our share of liberal judges who want to make law, rather than interpret it.
For similar reasons, our CCW class taught me we need to keep our concealed weapon on our person, in the car. If we keep it in a holster, under the dash (example), the others in the car could be charged for having a weapon in the car. Lots of fear of liberal judges wanting to rewrite laws that do not agree with their politics.
We have our share of liberal judges who want to make law, rather than interpret it.
For similar reasons, our CCW class taught me we need to keep our concealed weapon on our person, in the car. If we keep it in a holster, under the dash (example), the others in the car could be charged for having a weapon in the car. Lots of fear of liberal judges wanting to rewrite laws that do not agree with their politics.
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
You have to do more than just claim "self defense". You actually have to put on evidence supporting the claim of self defense, even in Florida.
For instance, once the prosecution in the Zimmerman case established all the elements for murder, manslaughter, etc., Zimmerman's attorney couldn't just assert self defense without putting on any evidence and then suddenly it was up to the prosecution to rebut the defense by producing all the evidence to show that it was not self defense.
http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.co...riminal-defense-case/affirmative-defense.htm#
http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/stand-your-ground-new-trends-self-defense-law.htm
This pretty much sums it up, once a defendant presents enough evidence to support a finding of self defense, then the prosecution must rebut it beyond a reasonable doubt.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/the-george-zimmerman-verdict.html#
So, the defendant has to put something on to even require the prosecution to rebut it. The burden just shifts to the prosecution somewhat easily.
- Aug 29, 2016
- 763
The amount of evidence a defendant must put forward is extremely minimal. In practice, the state has to disprove it.
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
Not a hard thing to disprove if the defendant puts barely anything forward to show the need for self defense.
esqappellate
President, MSI
- Feb 12, 2012
- 7,408
Agreed. And the prosecution need only negate one element of the self defense claim to prevail. It is easier to think of this as the burden of going forward vs. of the burden of persuasion. The defendant must come forward with (in Maryland) "some evidence" on each of the elements of the claim of self defense. Some evidence is not a lot and it could simply consist of the defendant's testimony. But that does require the defendant to take the stand and open himself up to impeachment. Once the defendant proffers "some evidence," the burden of persuasion is on the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the self defense claim fails (by showing, e.g., that the threat was not "imminent"). This is the approach followed in 49 states. Ohio has a system, in contrast, that places the burden of going forward and the burden of persuasion on the defendant throughout the trial. The Supreme Court sustained that system in Martin v. Ohio.
travistheone
Usual Suspect
this is a great example of "when assholes collide"
- Aug 29, 2016
- 763
I said that at the time. The retired cop was clearly in the wrong, but Oulson looked like a nasty prick.
Kharn
Ultimate Member
I'd prefer a tazer, less collateral damage, but at some point, you're talking a 30lb, $3000 cop's-bat-belt of gadgets rather than concealed and fitting in those tiny movie theater seats.
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
Just an update. Can you believe that this is still not resolved. The trial is scheduled for February 2019, which is 5 years after the shooting occurred. The shooter is going to be dead before this is resolved.
http://www.curtisreevestrial.com/
http://www.curtisreevestrial.com/
delaware_export
Ultimate Member
- Apr 10, 2018
- 3,241
i think that is the point, from the folks involved.
just drag things out, let him die of old age, at home.
and unlike the case being debated in the other thread, this guy is just guilty. but he is an ex/retired cop. professional courtesy. ?
it has already been ruled that he CAN NOT attempt to use SYG.
curtis reeves.
again, given the discussion in the other thread, i checked on this case a couple weeks ago. and went back and looked at the nj cop who shot the md guy back around 2013. both interesting cases. (found not guilty)
just drag things out, let him die of old age, at home.
and unlike the case being debated in the other thread, this guy is just guilty. but he is an ex/retired cop. professional courtesy. ?
it has already been ruled that he CAN NOT attempt to use SYG.
curtis reeves.
again, given the discussion in the other thread, i checked on this case a couple weeks ago. and went back and looked at the nj cop who shot the md guy back around 2013. both interesting cases. (found not guilty)
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
Here we are over 7 years after the shooting, and Curtis Reeves has still not faced his day in court. How can justice possibly be served to any victim when the person charged does not have to face trial for 7+ years. I don't care whether he is innocent or guilty at this point, but there should have been a trial well within 7 years of the incident to determine his guilt. I believe trial is currently set for April 7, 2021.
http://www.curtisreevestrial.com/
http://www.curtisreevestrial.com/
Taking this "03/12/2014 — WAIVED RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL" to the extreme.
Looks like there may have been video involved but not sure and the "Stand Your Ground" is in play (10/23/2015 — STAND YOUR GROUND MOTION EXTENDED TO ONE WEEK)
Kman
Blah, blah, blah
Pretty obvious that friendly folks in power are giving the old ******* time to die or loose his mind before any reckoning.
Aggravating, to say the least.
Aggravating, to say the least.
Growler215
Ultimate Member
Wow, a seven year old thread.
Even back then CNN was pushing stories like this.
Don't hold your breath waiting for them to publish stories about people defending themselves with a firearm...even though it happens every day. Doesn't advance their agenda.
Even back then CNN was pushing stories like this.
Don't hold your breath waiting for them to publish stories about people defending themselves with a firearm...even though it happens every day. Doesn't advance their agenda.
Last edited:
delaware_export
Ultimate Member
- Apr 10, 2018
- 3,241
Yep. I went back recently and checked on this one a few months ago. No movement. No trial.
Some would argue he previous position as a LEO is part of the reason. I am not sure about that, but than again. If it was you or me, we would have be already tried, with chips falling where they may.
I’d bet he dies before the trial, of natural causes or rona. At the very least, the dead guys wife deserve to see conclusion.
Is there some legal thing where a death before criminal verdict impacts possible civil suit issues?
Some would argue he previous position as a LEO is part of the reason. I am not sure about that, but than again. If it was you or me, we would have be already tried, with chips falling where they may.
I’d bet he dies before the trial, of natural causes or rona. At the very least, the dead guys wife deserve to see conclusion.
Is there some legal thing where a death before criminal verdict impacts possible civil suit issues?
Kharn
Ultimate Member
IIRC death before judgement is an automatic not-guilty or dismissal of any pending criminal charges.
Didn't Aaron Hernandez have his record wiped clean because he died during appeals after he was convicted?
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
Just want to thank the extremely awesome folks at Tyler Firearms- Latest: John from MD
-
-
-
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
Grand Power Stribog Restocked 9mm & 10mm $689.95 to $1649.00 Shipped- Started by DK Firearms
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
