No 'Stand Your Ground' Law Leaves Boxer Facing Million-Dollar Payday Also Facing 26 Years in Jail
OOOOOOH a Stand Your Ground case too I'm sure that will make Denilson a happy camper
No 'Stand Your Ground' Law Leaves Boxer Facing Million-Dollar Payday Also Facing 26 Years in Jail
OOOOOOH a Stand Your Ground case too I'm sure that will make Denilson a happy camper
It doesn't even sound like he should have been charged the way they describe the facts, I'd put money on his being found not guilty. He's in his house with his wife and kids, had warned the drug addict cousin not to enter or to leave, what can he do besides "stand his ground". Whether he had other options or not in reality, considering the cousin lived and has since apologized, I don't see him getting time.
Depends...you never know what kind of DA is running this case.
Indeed and boxers have a tendency to not get the benefit of doubt but @p4pking makes solid points on the circumstances.
Still, was a gun necessary let alone using it? Dangerous use of a firearm perhaps?
Not really related but I continue to wonder why Vernon chased armed robbers for a freakin watch?
Most don't like getting robbed.
Hurt or kill my mother or anyone else in my family including my dogs and I’ll max out my credit, cross oceans and live in the jungle to catch up to you and bleed you out slowly while I read Immanuel Kant aloud.
Taking my watch by armed robbery while my child is in the car saves your life.
He was a fighter. He had to chase them.
"No wide-ranging "stand your ground" law, the likes of which boosted George Zimmerman's chances of acquittal in his shooting of Trayvon Martin in Florida, exists in Arkansas."
Zimmerman's case wasn't a "stand your ground" case.
I don't know the details of Jermain's incident but there are obviously very strict laws attached to using a firearm to defend yourself. So who knows.
Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.
Remember reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol .
What I read in the case of Zimmerman, was that the basis of the Law which lead to his aquital was the "Stand your Ground" Law or "No duty to retreat", which I would think makes the article heading technically correct. Where as in Taylor case, the his state has a "Duty to Retreat" Law. Yes, the argument is "Self Defense" but the basis of the Law "Stand Your Ground" is to show what was the intent. Everything is about semantics but that is precisely what Lawyers argue. Taylor appearently made a recorded threat and afterward shot his cousin multiple times and also missed several times. The part about terroristic treat, I would think should surely be thrown out, but the intent to cause injury seems clear. So, my guess is there should be more emphasis on what the Jury will decide about his state of mind when he took the shots. Appearently the cousin is only in serious condition so I would think he would testify. I think it looks really bad for Taylor, even if he is seen as exercising self defense.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks