Gator5220

quote:

---

Did you listen to the reporter? He clearly says that the man went to the store

---

If true, she is the initial aggressor and she's done for. I'd like to see additional reporting on this because it seems odd he would leave his car in the middle of the parking aisle while he went in.

Maybe they were both angled in so he left it there thinking he was blocking her. Who knows? :dunno:

A 1 year old has lived through 1/250th of the nation's existence.

quote:

---

In law, words have meaning

---

Again, you can be charged with verbal assault, but courts have made it clear that verbal assault by itself requires a very high bar to convict because of free speech concerns. It's why verbal assault often times never makes it to a jury.

He was unarmed, so if he verbally threatened her (which we don't know), he was unarmed and did not have the ability to immediately follow through and act on the threat.

In Florida, it doesn't meet the requirements for SYG. She was in her car and had the ability to avoid the incident altogether by staying in or car or driving away and calling the cops. Instead, she stepped out of her car with a gun. When he walked towards her, she retreated. But when he retreated she moved towards him.

If she felt there was imminent bodily harm that required deadly force, why exit your vehicle? Why advance on him when he retreated?

She's going to have to answer these questions.

quote:

---

Everybody is a lawyer, but typically 90% of internet lawyers get the basic definition of assault mixed up with battery.

---

When was the last time you read about someone being charged with assault because of words? It's rare because of free speech concerns.

Assault and battery are charged together so much that in layman's terms most people think of assault as battery.

quote:

---

Wouldn’t they take this case to a grand jury first?

---

Only if they want an additional set of eyes to review the case. Usually the prosecutor makes the call.

It's not unusual for the suspect to be released while they investigate. After they finish the investigation, they present their findings to the prosecutor's office who makes the decision whether to prosecute or rule it as self defense.

The cops don't decide guilt.

quote:

---

He took steps towards her multiple times after she had the gun out and even followed her around the car neighboring the empty spot.

---

Again, that does not rise to the level of self-defense. Remember, he is unarmed.

quote:

---

If that was your wife I am certain you would think differently.

---

My first priority would be to remove us from the situation, not get out with my gun and become the aggressor against someone that is unarmed, which she had an opportunity to do when she was inside her own car.

quote:

---

Just the simple fact of her grabbing a gun doesn't make her the aggressor, especially if you actually watched the extended clip where he continue to act aggressive toward her WHILE she had the gun

---

Stepping out of your vehicle with a gun 100% makes you the aggressor because he was unarmed. Just acting aggressively doesn't by itself justify self-defense.

Essentially, this is a road rage incident. Imagine if acting aggressively during a road rage justified self defense.

quote:

---

The guy wasn’t present when she got out of her car.

---

Then there was no imminent threat to justify stepping out of her car with a gun. She escalated the situation.

quote:

---

He came storming up afterwards and as she retreated he bulldogged her all the way around at least one vehicle.

---

Taking out the hyperbole, he took one step towards her and she shot him.

That's murder. Just walking towards someone while unarmed doesn't qualify for Florida SYG.

Nampons. Literally the worst possible name they could have chosen.