Woman gets 20 years for firing warning shots

[eflatminor]

Woman goes to jail for 20 years for firing warning shots against an abusive husband, against which she had an ORDER OF PROTECTION.

Ok this is when you know there's a Gun Grabbing Agenda:

Fla. mom gets 20 years for firing warning shots - CBS News

Apparently she would have EASILY acquitted if she shot and killed hi and was able to prove he was a threat...

We live in a sick world.

It's a sick world where a woman can beat up her husband, then shoot and him and their children and then...horror of horror's....has to answer for it?

Yeah...really sick...ain't it?

But she didn't shoot him or his children. Nobody was shot. Nobody was hurt.

 

[Circe]

If she did not hit him they cannot prove that she shot at him


Oh, yes they can. If they know where she was, where he was, and where the bullets hit, it's a fairly simple deduction. Obviously, the jury sure thought they could.

Reminds me of the Jean Harris murder trial of diet Doctor Tarnower in the '70s. She testified that the gun went off by accident in their bedroom.

Since she shot at him nine times and hit him six times, this defense didn't work out well. She served 12 years.

 

[Againsheila]

Woman goes to jail for 20 years for firing warning shots against an abusive husband, against which she had an ORDER OF PROTECTION.

Ok this is when you know there's a Gun Grabbing Agenda:

Fla. mom gets 20 years for firing warning shots - CBS News

Apparently she would have EASILY acquitted if she shot and killed hi and was able to prove he was a threat...

We live in a sick world.

It's a sick world where a woman can beat up her husband, then shoot and him and their children and then...horror of horror's....has to answer for it?

Yeah...really sick...ain't it?

Yeah, it is a sick world. What the heck was she doing out of jail so she could go back and beat up her husband?

 

[AmyNation]

My mistake, she was convicted of 3 counts of arr. assault with a deadly weapon, not attempted murder.

The article said attempted murder. Are you sure the 3 counts of aggravated assault isn't what she was offered as a plea deal?

Florida woman sentenced to 20 years in controversial warning shot case - CNN.com

Yup. Everything I've read says 3 counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

 

[eflatminor]

Since she shot at him nine times and hit him six times, this defense didn't work out well. She served 12 years.

Another example of the evils of minimum sentencing. This one murdered someone and got 12 years. The woman in the OP hurt no one and got 20. Makes no sense.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Marissa Alexander was convicted by a jury of three women and three men, one of them an African-American woman like Marissa.

"It took them 13 minutes," Lincoln said of the jury. "They didn't ask to look at anything. They pretty much made their decision in ten minutes that she was guilty."

Marissa Alexander case exposes ambiguity of ?Stand Your Ground? law-Joy-Ann Reid, The Grio | Rodney L. Hurst, Sr.

 

[gallantwarrior]

This must be amazingly confusing for libtards. On one hand, the woman defended herself with a handgun and therefore deserves the maximum sentence. On the other hand, she's black and has been handed a maximum sentence for defending herself. How do they reconcile such contradictions?

 

[Oldguy]

She was not convicted of attempted murder nor do I believe, from what I've read, that was her intent.

The article posted said attempted murder. That's all I have to go by. Do you have something different?

Intent was proven to the satisfaction of the jury and that's all that counts in our legal system. Our own, personal opinions don't matter.

Obviously, but of course, juries can, and have, got it wrong. My point was to ridicule the prosecutors who said she didn't fire a warning shot because she didn't fire up into the ceiling. That makes no sense.

Of course juries sometimes get it wrong. That's why we have a process for appeals and maybe she will appeal and win. But, until she does, that's the verdict which must stand and we must agree with it or thumb our nose at the rule of law and put our own, personal opinions ahead of the law.

You may ridicule the prosecutors all you like, but the jury believed them.

Such that it warrants a jail sentence, no. Outside of some extraordinary circumstance where a big ass woman actually beats up a meeker man, any guy can prevent being 'beat up' by a woman. I suspect he made this claim to help convict her. No real man would admit to such a thing, much less use it to prosecute a female. It's pathetic.

You couldn't be more wrong. Many, many men are physically abused by their wives (I know 2 personally), but most won't admit it for fear of ridicule.

I understand this, which is why I condemned minimum sentencing.

Bottom line, no one, IMO, should get 20 years if they hurt no one or didn't take something that didn't belong to them. I find the very idea immoral.

I don't much care for mandatory sentencing either, but you must remember that such was instituted as a part of the ever popular "get tough on crime" movement born of judges who were deemed too lenient by the public. Without mandatory sentences, some judges would let malefactors like this woman off with a literal slap on the hand, which would also piss people off.

In the end, it's up to the citizens of Florida to decide what they want to do about mandatory sentencing, through their elected representatives in Tallahassee, and this is what they've said they want, no matter what you or I think about it. State's rights, you know.

 

[Oldguy]

Oh, yes they can. If they know where she was, where he was, and where the bullets hit, it's a fairly simple deduction. Obviously, the jury sure thought they could.

A black woman convicted by a white jury (just one black man on jury).

Marissa Alexander was convicted by a jury of three women and three men, one of them an African-American woman like Marissa.

"It took them 13 minutes," Lincoln said of the jury. "They didn't ask to look at anything. They pretty much made their decision in ten minutes that she was guilty."

At the very least she should get a retrial for a fucked jury.

Marissa Alexander case exposes ambiguity of ?Stand Your Ground? law-Joy-Ann Reid, The Grio | Rodney L. Hurst, Sr.

What? Do you REALLY believe a predominantly black jury would do a better job of considering the facts as presented in court?

Why? And, based upon what evidence? This isn't the 1950's, you know.

 

[Oldguy]

We live in a sick world.

It's a sick world where a woman can beat up her husband, then shoot and him and their children and then...horror of horror's....has to answer for it?

Yeah...really sick...ain't it?

But she didn't shoot him or his children. Nobody was shot. Nobody was hurt.

Yeah. My spell checker changed the word "at" to "and" in my post. I've corrected it.

 

[Oldguy]

My mistake, she was convicted of 3 counts of arr. assault with a deadly weapon, not attempted murder.

The article said attempted murder. Are you sure the 3 counts of aggravated assault isn't what she was offered as a plea deal?

Florida woman sentenced to 20 years in controversial warning shot case - CNN.com

Yup. Everything I've read says 3 counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

The original links says this:

"Alexander was convicted of attempted murder"

In any case, whatever the charge, she was convicted and that's that.

 

[eflatminor]

Our own, personal opinions don't matter.

Clearly. But that doesn't mean we can share our opinion!

In my humble opinion, I do not believe anyone should face 20 years in jail for a 'crime' in which nobody was hurt and nothing was taken. Just my opinion, which I understand doesn't matter to the courts.

From what I've read, it was not an attempted murder charge but aggravated assault. I don't see how you can assault someone without hurting them.

 

[Avatar4321]

20 years???? I know of a guy who actually murdered someone and got 1 1/2.

That's messed up. How is it attempted murder if you fire warning shots? Doesn't attempted murder actually require an attempt?

 

[Oldguy]

Our own, personal opinions don't matter.

Clearly. But that doesn't mean we can share our opinion!

In my humble opinion, I do not believe anyone should face 20 years in jail for a 'crime' in which nobody was hurt and nothing was taken. Just my opinion, which I understand doesn't matter to the courts.

From what I've read, it was not an attempted murder charge but aggravated assault. I don't see how you can assault someone without hurting them.

Depending upon the state, assault can include even verbal assault if it puts the victim in fear of bodily harm.

 

[AmyNation]

Zero Tolerence laws never work out well. I agree 20 years is a lot, in my state she probably would have got 5 and been out in 3.

 

[eflatminor]

Our own, personal opinions don't matter.

Clearly. But that doesn't mean we can share our opinion!

In my humble opinion, I do not believe anyone should face 20 years in jail for a 'crime' in which nobody was hurt and nothing was taken. Just my opinion, which I understand doesn't matter to the courts.

From what I've read, it was not an attempted murder charge but aggravated assault. I don't see how you can assault someone without hurting them.

Depending upon the state, assault can include even verbal assault if it puts the victim in fear of bodily harm.

I'm sure you're right. We put LOTS of people in jail that did nothing to hurt anyone nor did they take what didn't belong to them. I think that's wrong.

 

[Oldguy]

Zero Tolerence laws never work out well. I agree 20 years is a lot, in my state she probably would have got 5 and been out in 3.

In my county down here in "red" Texas, she might have gotten 10 years, probation or deferred adjudication, depending upon which judge she drew. For instance, in the two state district courts here last month, several people came up on charges of DWI, 3rd or subsequent. In one court, they uniformly received state jail terms of 3 to 6 years. In the other court, they all got 3-5 years probation....for exactly the same charge.

That kind of disparity is precisely the reason we have mandatory sentencing.

If there is a happy medium, a compromise position between the two, I've yet to see it.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Lol @ the Op for crying about gun grabbing and not reading his own story.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Lol @ the Op for crying about gun grabbing and not reading his own story.

What part did I not read?

CBS News) JACKSONVILLE, Fla. - A Florida woman who fired warning shots against her allegedly abusive husband has been sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Marissa Alexander of Jacksonville had said the state's "Stand Your Ground" law should apply to her because she was defending herself against her allegedly abusive husband when she fired warning shots inside her home in August 2010. She told police it was to escape a brutal beating by her husband, against whom she had already taken out a protective order.

CBS Affiliate WETV reports that Circuit Court Judge James Daniel handed down the sentence Friday.

Under Florida's mandatory minimum sentencing requirements Alexander could receive a lesser sentence, even though she has never been in trouble with the law before. Judge Daniel said the law did not allow for extenuating or mitigating circumstances to reduce the sentence below the 20-year minimum.

"I really was crying in there," Marissa's 11-year-old daughter told WETV. "I didn't want to cry in court, but I just really feel hurt. I don't think this should have been happening."

Alexander was convicted of attempted murder after she rejected a plea deal for a three-year prison sentence. She said she did not believe she did anything wrong.

She was recently denied a new trial after appealing to the judge to reconsider her case based on Florida's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law. The law states that the victim of a crime does not have to attempt to run for safety and can immediately retaliate in self-defense.

Alexander's attorney said she was clearly defending herself and should not have to spend the next two decades behind bars.

Alexander's case has drawn support from domestic abuse advocates - and comparison to the case of neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, who has claimed a "Stand Your Ground" defense in his fatal shooting of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin.

It's obviously a propaganda conviction. Should not have even been brought to trial by a Grand Jury.

 

[bendog]

LOL. The gun nutters are upset even though she went to the house thinking he wasn't around. Seeing him there, SHE LEFT THE HOUSE, WENT TO HER CAR, GOT A GUN, WENT BACK INSIDE AND DISCHARGED THE GUN. Nothing improper there, no siree.

Then, making this more delightful, THE JUDGE SAID HE' D HAVE GIVEN A LIGHTER SENTENCE BUT THE MADATORY SENTENCING LAW DRAFTED BY A GOPER AND SIGNED BY ..... Anyone? Anyone? .... JEB GAVE THE JUDGE NO OPTION.