Marissa Alexander

ItsTheSheppy · 2012-05-11, 10:53 PM

A woman has been sentenced in Florida to 20 years in prison for firing a warning shot at her abusive husband.

She attempted to use the Stand Your Ground law to justify the shot, which as far as I can tell hit and hurt nobody. Apparently there were children in the house.

Claiming she feared for her life, she fired a warning shot into the wall. Rejected a plea deal that would have netted her three years of prison time, she has instead been sentenced to 20 years.

Curious how the cops didn't even investigate Trayvon Martin's killing because Zimmerman cited Stand Your Ground, but here a warning shot that kills nobody nets this woman 20 years in jail.

Oh, and she's black. So there's that.

And before you ask, no the system is working just fine. There is no prejudice, the law is perfectly sound and being enforced fairly and evenly, thank you very much.

Baneblade · 2012-05-11, 11:28 PM

So, what is your point?

Neurotoxin · 2012-05-12, 12:43 AM

A Caucasian man shoots an African-American minor, and the "stand your ground" law is utilized to prevent any investigation.

An African-American woman fires a bullet under the rules of the "stand your ground" law, nobody is hurt, and she is sentenced to 20 years instead of being taken up on a plea for 3.

White guy shoots a black kid dead and there's no investigation until mass outcry demands it. Black woman fires a gun in self defense and harms nobody, and she won't see her kids on her own terms til they've grown up.

It isn't a matter of asking whats wrong with the system, its a matter of asking what is actually right about it anymore. Nothing our legal system is corrupt, subjective, and poorly-conducted, at its best (except when police are deployed to sort out a mass gathering of workers, then they are an efficient oppressing machine).

CutterJohn · 2012-05-12, 02:03 AM

Because its bogus. The woman 'stood her ground' by leaving the house, getting a gun, and coming back. The bullet was aimed at the husbands head(he was leaving, btw), while the kids were next to him, barely missing him and going through a wall until it was lodged in a ceiling. She was arrested, released, and and returned to the house in violation of a restraining order and assaulted him again, and had to be arrested. Again.

She had ample opportunity to leave, chose not to, and chose to escalate the situation with a firearm, and then actually discharged it at her husband and her kids. She is fucking psycho and got what she deserved.

Cites:

http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/897...fhhnu641jfe9bv
http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/897...miqwxbhymqs4e5
http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/897...i7qbrfuufztfx4

Oh, heck, just go here. http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/com...od_her/c4d89zx

ItsTheSheppy · 2012-05-12, 07:25 AM

According to the stand your ground law there is no obligation to retreat. It was her house. She shouldn't have to flee her own house. STAND YOUR GROUND!!!1!!1!1

Whether or not you think she's crazy is inconsequential. The fact remains is she hurt nobody. She didn't, say, kill someone. But she goes to prison for two decades, and meanwhile it took the entire country going in an uproar for the Florida police to finally, begrudgingly, arrest Zimmerman.

Who by the way commands a great deal of support from people who, for example, are selling targets online made to look like Trayvon Martin.

But no worries, racism is long gone and all of this makes perfect logical sense.

CutterJohn · 2012-05-12, 09:13 AM

Originally Posted by ItsTheSheppy

According to the stand your ground law there is no obligation to retreat. It was her house. She shouldn't have to flee her own house. STAND YOUR GROUND!!!1!!1!1

It was both of their house. And she'd already left, then came back with a gun.

ItsTheSheppy · 2012-05-14, 07:50 AM

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

It was both of their house. And she'd already left, then came back with a gun.

Because she didn't have her keys and needed to go back into the house to get them. the house where her abusive husband was; a person she thought was going to try and kill her. I'd have gone back in armed too. To 'stand my ground'.

Goku · 2012-05-14, 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by ItsTheSheppy

Because she didn't have her keys and needed to go back into the house to get them. the house where her abusive husband was; a person she thought was going to try and kill her. I'd have gone back in armed too. To 'stand my ground'.

That is extremely skewed logic. She needs her keys? Really so you go back in there and with a gun to get them? Total fail written all over it. If she got out of the house fine she should of called the cops with her cell or went to a neighbors to do so. She is the one that was making it worse at this point.

If I was in fear of my life I wouldn't be running back into the house for some stupid keys.

Stand your ground isn't coming back and blowing someone's head off.

ArcIyte · 2012-05-14, 09:45 AM

LOL, you're serious aren't you?

For someone who always claims the intellectual high ground you've really stepped in it with both feet here.

Baneblade · 2012-05-14, 09:59 AM

She escalated the conflict. Did she have the gun when she left the house?

ItsTheSheppy · 2012-05-14, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by Goku

That is extremely skewed logic. She needs her keys? Really so you go back in there and with a gun to get them? Total fail written all over it. If she got out of the house fine she should of called the cops with her cell or went to a neighbors to do so. She is the one that was making it worse at this point.

If I was in fear of my life I wouldn't be running back into the house for some stupid keys.

Stand your ground isn't coming back and blowing someone's head off.

Well, if it's your house, why shouldn't it be?

The law states that there is no obligation to retreat. Everything you are saying about how she 'should have done' this or 'should have done' that is ireelevant because the law allows her to defend herself. She had no obligation to leave the house. She had every right to walk back in, armed, and defend herself.

And, by the way, nobody got hurt. she missed. Intentionally. She didn't, say, pursue someone in the dead of night and create a situation where she then killed them, even though they were armed with a pack of skittles. This woman feared for her life in her own home.

I just want to make it clear that I think the 'Stand Your Ground' law and all laws like it are the pinnacle of dumbshit stupidity. I am merely pointing out that it is interesting, to me, that a white(ish) man kills a black teenager, declares 'Stand Your Ground', and is not even initially investigated; it takes the country breaking into an uproar for the police to even make an arrest.

A black woman, however, tries a similar defense in a case where she was in her own home and nobody got hurt and she's going to jail for two decades. They couldn't lock her up fast enough.

It's just, you know. Interesting. Strangely incongruous.

I am OF COURSE not suggesting that race had anything to do with it because racism stopped when we elected Obama. Everyone knows that.

CutterJohn · 2012-05-14, 10:26 PM

Dude. She hadn't lived there in months. Her husband had been living there with the kids. It was the husbands home. She left the house, then chose to put herself back into the situation with a gun. Stand your ground does not mean leave and come back with a gun so you can stand your ground.

And she never once called the cops.

Even if she needed her keys, thats no excuse. You do not go looking for a confrontation if you have a gun. That gun is there to protect you. It is not added leverage for you to assert yourself. It is there as an absolute last resort, after you've done everything possible to avoid a confrontation. She had already avoided the confrontation by leaving the house, went and got a gun, and chose to go back inside rather than call the cops to get her keys.

If you want to argue that the punishment is too extreme, by all means, and I may even agree to an extent, but the fact that she's guilty of stupidity and in no way followed the spirit or letter of the law is not in any dispute.

Vash02 · 2012-05-15, 02:37 AM

Having not read the story or its particulars, has anyone taken the children into account? Wouldn't the mother by remiss in her motherly duty if she knowingly left them in the hands of a abusive man? Not saying she wasn't an idiot for not calling the police, but surely there would of been some leeway for a mother on a mission?

CutterJohn · 2012-05-15, 03:14 AM

Originally Posted by Vash02

Having not read the story or its particulars, has anyone taken the children into account? Wouldn't the mother by remiss in her motherly duty if she knowingly left them in the hands of a abusive man? Not saying she wasn't an idiot for not calling the police, but surely there would of been some leeway for a mother on a mission?

You mean 'Father'. They were his kids, not hers, from a prior relationship. The two had just had a baby, which was still in the hospital.

And having not read the story or its particulars, why do you make the assumption the man was abusive?

Vash02 · 2012-05-15, 05:08 AM

Something must of wound her up to the point of bringing a deadly weapon in range of her children.