Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Stand-your-Ground ????

Seems to fail stand your ground, since the attacker didn't seem like he was planning a follow up attack, but was walking away. Sure, the attacker was wrong, and I don't feel particularly badly for someone who's shot after initiating a serious, unprovoked, assault, but I don't see stand your ground self defense, here. Looked like someone taking the job of executioner for the crime of assault. Assault should be punished, but not by being shot in the chest.

Now, had the attacker looked in any way like he was moving in for assault number two, that would be lawful self defense if he's shot. Also, had the attacker approached aggressively, gone for the shove, and was shot in the process, that's lawful self defense (You have no obligation to remain passive while someone is moving in to knock you off your feet onto the pavement). But not the way it happened. After the fact, you can't execute someone, even if that someone was in the wrong in what he had done.

That's my take, anyway, and I hate to second guess the guy who used his weapon in response to an assault, but the distinction in the law is clear between shooting to punish for an assault and shooting to stop an assault.

I'm sure every state's 'stand your ground' law is different. In Louisiana, their is a clause that states, "Any person "who is in a place where he or she has a right," including a public space, does not have an obligation "to retreat" if faced with a real or perceived threat and "may stand his or her ground and meet force with force."

Since the fellow came from the store and shoved the man onto the ground, that is a real threat. If the man that was shot threatened the man while he was on the ground, that would be a perceived threat, especially since he had already used force. I think the shooting would be justified.

What I'm trying to say is that he used force and if (no sound) he threatened the man on the ground, that would be perceived threat and the man on the ground defended himself.

I dont agree with the man provoking people who parked in handicapped spaces..... that's a job for LEO's.

All "stand your ground" does is remove from the self-defense statute the obligation to retreat when you may safely do so. Before stand your ground, you were burdened to persuade the trier of fact that you had no safe means of escape. After stand your ground, you don't have to persuade anyone of that. That leaves only the part of self defense law that requires that you reasonably feared imminent death or serious bodily injury the moment you fired. That part doesn't go away with stand your ground.

I don't see that here. The attack was already in the past, and there was no sign of a new attack coming. Mere verbal threats like "stay down or I'll knock you down again," or even "I'm gonna kill your ass," don't suffice absent body language to match, which didn't seem to be exhibited in this case.

In the film, it appears the man moved back, after he saw the gun. I was taught that if your gonna draw it, use it. Without sound, it's hard to determine exactly what happened or was said. Also, I dont know the Florida's law. I think in La. this would have been justified.

But, I've been wrong before...... just ask my wife!

I don’t think we will miss the attacker. That was the last old person he will assault. Hasbeen

Shooting or getting shot over a parking spot is not very bright.Walk away.

Legit.

I got this from a friend who lives in Tampa this morning,
http://www.fox13news.com/news/local...ot-leads-to-deadly-shooting-deputies-say


http://www.fox13news.com/news/local...ot-leads-to-deadly-shooting-deputies-say


And then there is this,
Seems like the “shooter” had argued over this parking spot before.
Detectives said Drejka was cooperative with investigators and has a valid concealed weapons license with the state.

According to Salous, it's not the first time Drejka started an argument over the parking spot. Salous said he wasn't surprised the fatal shooting occurred since he said he witnessed Drejka become argumentative last month.

"I told him, 'Don't do that,' and he won't listen," Salous explained to FOX 13.

He said he had to call the police after that fight.

The case will now go to the State Attorney's Office.

Ronnie

Video including shooting.

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=sqPbL_1532105651

Wonder if the shooter is black or white?
Parking spot was marked really well...
http://www.fox13news.com/news/347972791-video

Ronnie

He was attacked-- pushed to the ground, that is assualt!
He has the right to self protection!

It doesn't matter what any of thinks. It only matters what a jury thinks and I don't think they'd consider this self defense since the attacker had stepped back and didn't show any sign of attacking again.

He was assualted!
Whether the guy backed off or not may be irrelevant.
My guess is that no charges will be filed.

Is it his job to enforce parking? Hell no!

Doesn't look good at all. Yeah, the guy who shoved him is a dirt bag, but that's not by itself justification. The shooting has to be preventative of attack, not afterwards.

The police seem to agree, since they are not filing charges. Not sure I agree with them, even if I have little sympathy with the attacker who got shot for what he did.

Borderline, but in my experience a tie goes to the accused. A grand jury will probably not indict. The sheriff seemed pretty unconcerned. Maybe he already knew the participants and figures no great loss.

The guy deserved to get shot, not enough facts in evidence to know if deadly force was legally justified. At least young Markeis Jr. learned that actions have consequences, and letting your woman illegally park in Handicapped spaces is bad karma.

If you choose to play vigilante there may be dues to pay.


mike r

Going a little off topic... She was not parked, she was "standing". As in No Stopping, Standing or Parking. Stopping is, for instance, to let someone get out of the car and then move on. Standing is remaining stopped with driver remaining at the wheel. Parking is turning the car off and leaving it.

Now if she was stopped in that space with no right to park in that space and someone came along who was entitled to use that space and she refused to move, that is probably parking.

Was the shooter politely asking her to move or was he hassling her? If he started the hassle, does he lose his recourse to self defense? It seems like the shooter instigated the confrontation between himself and the group of people related to the parked car.

Was it justified? I don't know. Seems like thin ice to me.

This may stop other [bleep] from shoving people!