Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > General Topics > Concealed Carry & Self Defense
o

Notices

Concealed Carry & Self Defense All aspects of Concealed and Open Carry, Home and Self Defense.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 07-15-2018, 03:12 PM
Hapworth Hapworth is offline
Member
2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough  
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,829
Likes: 3,902
Liked 5,900 Times in 2,542 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnrh View Post
I guess I'm missing something. I thought the the point of the OP was on who has the burden of proving the shooting is self defense, the shooter or the prosecutor. It was not if you had the right to shoot to defend yourself. In FL the burden shifted to the prosecutor from the shooter. Big difference.

A part of that law,if i'm correct on that law, also said that if the shooting was justified then there could be no civil suit filed. That part of the law was overturned by the FL Supreme court.
You're entirely correct and so is the OP -- the topic is burden of proof and on whom it lies, the prosecution or the defense. Many posting in this thread aren't getting it and have gone in the weeds. You aren't missing a thing...
__________________
Pickpocket
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 07-15-2018, 07:59 PM
sigp220.45's Avatar
sigp220.45 sigp220.45 is online now
US Veteran
2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough  
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 8,075
Likes: 27,786
Liked 33,569 Times in 5,253 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hapworth View Post
You're entirely correct and so is the OP -- the topic is burden of proof and on whom it lies, the prosecution or the defense. Many posting in this thread aren't getting it and have gone in the weeds. You aren't missing a thing...
The folks here who have actually worked in the system realize it changes nothing. The burden of proof has always been on the prosecution, and it still is. A person charged with a crime doesn't have to take the stand or put on a single witness.

No matter where you are, if you want the jury to believe you killed someone in self defense, you still will have to say SOMETHING. If you don't, you can bet the prosecution will put on a pretty good case that you didn't act in self defense. After all, your shooting was iffy enough to get yourself charged with a crime. If you want to sit on your hands, you can certainly do so. I would recommend you have someone put some dough in your commissary account for ramen noodles and hand lotion.
__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

Last edited by sigp220.45; 07-15-2018 at 08:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #53  
Old 07-16-2018, 10:20 AM
Johnrh Johnrh is offline
Member
2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough  
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 159
Likes: 224
Liked 138 Times in 69 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sigp220.45 View Post
The folks here who have actually worked in the system realize it changes nothing. The burden of proof has always been on the prosecution, and it still is. A person charged with a crime doesn't have to take the stand or put on a single witness.

No matter where you are, if you want the jury to believe you killed someone in self defense, you still will have to say SOMETHING. If you don't, you can bet the prosecution will put on a pretty good case that you didn't act in self defense. After all, your shooting was iffy enough to get yourself charged with a crime. If you want to sit on your hands, you can certainly do so. I would recommend you have someone put some dough in your commissary account for ramen noodles and hand lotion.

Not in Stand Your Ground cases, at least in FL. In FL there is a hearing before trial if you claim SYG. In that hearing, before the law, you had to prove it was justified not the prosecutor proving it was not justified. Now the prosecutor has to prove it was NOT justified. The burden of proof is now on the prosecutor.

You're now going to say "yeah, that's what I said" but no you would be wrong. It all depends on how the law is written for SYG cases. Like I said, prior to the law change in FL the burden of proof was on you that you were justified. It was "you're guilty, you prove you're not".

It's easy to equate SYG with SD but they are two different things.

Last edited by Johnrh; 07-16-2018 at 10:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 07-16-2018, 10:26 AM
Ziggy2525's Avatar
Ziggy2525 Ziggy2525 is offline
Member
2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough  
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 624
Liked 3,247 Times in 1,007 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sigp220.45 View Post
The folks here who have actually worked in the system realize it changes nothing. The burden of proof has always been on the prosecution, and it still is. A person charged with a crime doesn't have to take the stand or put on a single witness.

No matter where you are, if you want the jury to believe you killed someone in self defense, you still will have to say SOMETHING. If you don't, you can bet the prosecution will put on a pretty good case that you didn't act in self defense. After all, your shooting was iffy enough to get yourself charged with a crime. If you want to sit on your hands, you can certainly do so. I would recommend you have someone put some dough in your commissary account for ramen noodles and hand lotion.
My disclaimer - I am not an attorney. I’ve seen cases in my state where the judge had disallowed (is that a word) a defendent from making a self defense claim during their trial. I guess the judge didn’t think the elements of the case supported self defense. I wonder if the Florida thing would prevent a judge from doing that?
__________________
Vegan by proxy.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 07-16-2018, 10:55 AM
Johnrh Johnrh is offline
Member
2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough  
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 159
Likes: 224
Liked 138 Times in 69 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy2525 View Post
My disclaimer - I am not an attorney. I’ve seen cases in my state where the judge had disallowed (is that a word) a defendent from making a self defense claim during their trial. I guess the judge didn’t think the elements of the case supported self defense. I wonder if the Florida thing would prevent a judge from doing that?
If someone is making a SYG claim then that goes before a judge prior to any trial. As to SD claim I don't know, I guess in FL that is up to a jury as was done in the George Zimmerman case. Zimmerman did not argue SYG but SD. I don't see how he could argue SYG as he followed Martin. But, like you, I'm not an attorney. I wonder in the case you mentioned if the defendant asked for a judge rather than a jury trial.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 07-16-2018, 01:59 PM
Walkingwolf's Avatar
Walkingwolf Walkingwolf is offline
Member
2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough 2nd Amendment is not enough  
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,624
Likes: 2,003
Liked 1,653 Times in 809 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnrh View Post
Not in Stand Your Ground cases, at least in FL. In FL there is a hearing before trial if you claim SYG. In that hearing, before the law, you had to prove it was justified not the prosecutor proving it was not justified. Now the prosecutor has to prove it was NOT justified. The burden of proof is now on the prosecutor.

You're now going to say "yeah, that's what I said" but no you would be wrong. It all depends on how the law is written for SYG cases. Like I said, prior to the law change in FL the burden of proof was on you that you were justified. It was "you're guilty, you prove you're not".

It's easy to equate SYG with SD but they are two different things.
That hearing is ruled on by the judge. Judges have been bending laws since the beginning of this country. The reality is, and has always been that though supposedly innocent until proven guilty does not mean jack. People lose their jobs based on their arrest though they are tech innocent, they have to lose thousands of dollars while supposedly innocent. They lose RIGHTS while waiting trial even though they are innocent.

I have no sympathy for criminals, but a very small amount of the people arrested may very well be innocent. But they definitely will not be treated like they are innocent until proven so, and even then the repercussions will still linger.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do you REALLY believe in the 2nd Amendment? vito 2nd Amendment Forum 127 06-20-2015 05:24 PM
Cri de Couer on the 2nd Amendment msinabottle 2nd Amendment Forum 1 02-10-2013 02:52 AM
My take on the 2nd Amendment BCDWYO 2nd Amendment Forum 16 12-26-2012 02:11 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:59 AM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)