Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Another test of 'Stand Your Ground'? Unarmed robber shot. Marion Co., Ocala

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156

    Another test of 'Stand Your Ground'? Unarmed robber shot. Marion Co., Ocala

    http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/another-t...d/?cat_orig=us

    http://www.ocala.com/article/2013031...tc=pgall&tc=ar

    An elderly man in Ocala, Fla., told investigators he shot and critically wounded a man who had been following him in a car. James Stevens, 81, told deputies he noticed a car following him on Sunday for about 20 minutes, the Ocala Star-Banner reported.
    Hollingsworth has had numerous run-ins with the law and was convicted in 2008 of carrying a concealed firearm and altering the serial number of a firearm. He also was charged with wearing a bulletproof vest in the commission of an attempted crime, but that charge was dropped.

    Hollingsworth did not have a weapon Sunday, reports noted.

    The Sheriff's Office is continuing to investigate the incident. No charges had been filed late Monday.

  2. #2
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    The media will claim from now on that every self defense shooting is a "test of stand your ground" to sensationalize an obvious and natural common law standard. It's kind of like where they say "the gun was registered" or he "had a permit" when the gun was only used to defend inside of a home. Presumably this is to reinforce the false idea that we're only granted gun privileges on a probationary basis and that's obviously the way it should be.
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by 77zach View Post
    It's kind of like where they say "the gun was registered" or he "had a permit" when the gun was only used to defend inside of a home. Presumably this is to reinforce the false idea that we're only granted gun privileges on a probationary basis and that's obviously the way it should be.
    This has always been one of my biggest pet peeves. A buddy of mine who's a gun owner in Michigan was shootin the breeze with me about guns, and he was talking about how he had to go all the way out to his local police station after buying a handgun to register it, and asked me how far my local PD was. I said we don't register guns in Florida. He thought I was joking with him.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Talesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pinellas County
    Posts
    41
    That's a tough one to call with the only facts being what was printed and made available to the press.

    Had the perp actually entered the shooter's car by so much as a fingernail then the forcible felony part of SYG could be readily invoked.

    A [grand] jury would be correct in asking why the shooter didn't lead the perp to a police station or someplace very public elsewhere where a LEO could be summoned or other assistance would be available.

    I don't give the shooter much hope (given the scant facts presented).
    Last edited by Talesman; 03-13-2013 at 06:48 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Talesman View Post
    That's a tough one to call with the only facts being what was printed and made available to the press.

    Had the perp actually entered the shooter's car by so much as a fingernail then the forcible felony part of SYG could be readily invoked.

    A [grand] jury would be correct in asking why the shooter didn't lead the perp to a police station or someplace very public elsewhere where a LEO could be summoned or other assistance would be available.

    I don't give the shooter much hope (given the scant facts presented).
    The scant facts presented don't show the shooter to be in any more jeopardy than would normally be associated with a self defense shooting. The assailant has a record that (granted in hind sight) shows he was a threat, the age of the potential victim leads to disparity of force, he was lawfully where he was, the assailant attempted to commit a felony robbery, and there is the issue of hte elderly mans frailty (81 is frail) which means he would be quite reasonable to believe that he was in threat of great bodily harm.

    Of course there is always more to the story than gets reported and without ALL the facts passing judgment is premature. BUT, it doen't look horrible for the LAC.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Talesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pinellas County
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    The scant facts presented don't show the shooter to be in any more jeopardy than would normally be associated with a self defense shooting. The assailant has a record that (granted in hind sight) shows he was a threat, the age of the potential victim leads to disparity of force, he was lawfully where he was, the assailant attempted to commit a felony robbery, and there is the issue of hte elderly mans frailty (81 is frail) which means he would be quite reasonable to believe that he was in threat of great bodily harm.

    Of course there is always more to the story than gets reported and without ALL the facts passing judgment is premature. BUT, it doen't look horrible for the LAC.
    Self-defense (what Mr. Zimmerman and both his previous and current set of lawyers aver(ed) as his defense)) is not part and parcel of SYG. SYG was in the title of the original post. Two separate and distinct defenses under the law. Generally, you have to pick one or the other and prepare your [defense] case accordingly.
    Last edited by Talesman; 03-15-2013 at 04:53 PM.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    “I didn’t want to shoot him, but I had to. I shot him,” said Stevens.
    Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/another-t...FLzkbxWv4O3.99

    Felt he "owed to him" eh?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQMr9DvXXF8 at 1:15

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Talesman View Post
    That's a tough one to call with the only facts being what was printed and made available to the press.
    +1 ... I'm leaning on he had no cause to shoot

  9. #9
    Regular Member Talesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pinellas County
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    +1 ... I'm leaning on he had no cause to shoot
    My wife, the Dem ultra-liberal, saw it as I did and immediately thought to not lead the suspected perp to a more open place or safer place was foolish (again, using only the scant report). But, bless her heart, she did say that what the gentleman does have going for him was his age.

    She has served on one more jury than I have and did state she would most certainly take his age and physical condidtion into account regardless of any applicable laws. Guess my years of ranting about jury nullification did make a tiny impact on her thinking process. Too bad neither of us will be called on this case.

    I do wish the old gentlrman well. I just do not have high hopes for a no process by the SA or dismissal by a grand jury. The world is watching and everyone is under the gun (no pun intended).
    Last edited by Talesman; 03-17-2013 at 03:54 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •