So the Tampa Bay Times published
a database of information about people who have supposedly invoked Stand Your
Ground laws. I have been going through
it to determine if it was invoking one of two unusual features of Florida
legislation: 1) the abolition (mostly) of the duty to retreat, which I refer to
as SYG-no-retreat, and 2) the institution of the right to a hearing before
trial to determine if you are immune because you acted in self-defense, which I
refer to SYG-immunity. In each case, I
am trying to determine if the case is arguably about Stand Your Ground in any
form, or is it a more classic case of self-defense.
So I have already completed
eighteen of these in the last
post, and now I will do thirty six more. I
suggest you read my prior post first, because I am going to refer freely to my
findings there as though you had.
And one more thing before I
start. One thing that became obvious
when studying the Tampa Bay Times’ database is that they were being very
arbitrary in deciding whom they called Hispanic or not. On one hand, they called George Zimmerman
Hispanic. On the other hand there are
many people that society would almost certainly construct as Hispanic that the
Tampa Bay Times are labeling white. And
there are some where you suspect that they are doing this, but you are not sure. So expect me to note that now and then.
So let’s dive in again, again
naming cases by the first victim listed.
White guy killed by white
guy. Misener, a 44 year old man, was on
his property—but not actually in his house—when he saw Hutchison coming out of
his camper. He pointed a sawed-off
shotgun at him and claimed he only fired—killing the victim—when he lunged at
him. There were no other witnesses. Hutchison was unarmed.
So no SYG-immunity. And SYG-no-retreat doesn’t apply,
either. As noted in the last post in the
Sherdavia Jenkins case, you cannot claim stand your ground if you are actually
committing a crime at the time, and weapons charges can trigger that exception
to the SYG-no-retreat rule.
One white killer, killing two
white guys. The interesting thing is
that this case came up before. When
talking about the Sherdavia Jenkins, I quoted from the courts citing a case
called Dorsey
v. State, citing it for the proposition that unlawful possession of a
firearm is illegal activity negating the SYG-no-retreat rule. John Dorsey, the killer in this case, is the
same person.
So right off the bat, this is not
a SYG-no-retreat case. But the courts
have reversed his conviction for Second Degree Murder for other reasons, and
remanded the case to the trial court for retrial for Manslaughter. So at this time, the case is pending, which
means I won’t say more because I feel like the facts are not fully settled.
This case involves a black victim
and a black killer. Apparently, the
killer, Martinez, did request a SYG-immunity hearing, but I am at a loss to
understand how he could even claim self-defense from the facts related:
Rashad Stewart
Martinez shot and killed a man he said had repeatedly bullied him and come
looking for a fight over a girl. Tremayne Deangelo Lovett, 19, showed up at
Martinez's apartment complex with a friend. Onlookers separated the men and got
Martinez to return to his apartment, but Martinez grabbed a gun, jumped out of
a window and began roaming the halls calling Lovett out. The physical
confrontation resumed and Martinez said he warned Lovett to back off.
Martinez's brother testified that Martinez fired first then chased Lovett as he
fled down the stairs. Lovett was killed by a shot to the back of the head as he
ran away. He was not armed.
So the confrontation was over, he
calls the guy out, argues with him and then shoots at him, eventually hitting
him in the back of the head. Oh, and
Lovett was unarmed and I don’t even see an allegation that he took a swing at Martinez.
But evidently he was asserting
self-defense... somehow... and perhaps like in other cases, the Tampa Bay Times
is not telling us enough to understand why he thought this was
self-defense. In any case, since this
was not actually in his apartment, his conviction probably represents a failed
attempt to assert a SYG-no-retreat rule.
White guy on white guy violence,
here, and what is unusual is that they list “unknown” when discussing whether
the victim was armed. Here’s what they
mean. The two men, Oliver and Samuel H.
Shuttleworth, were roomates. They had
guns in the place and they had some kind of argument. There was only one living witness, Shuttleworth
and he said Oliver had a gun and he acted in self-defense. So they say it is unknown whether Oliver is
armed, because they are not sure whether to believe him or not.
Shuttleworth was never charged,
so SYG immunity doesn’t apply. On the
other hand, prior to passing Stand Your Ground, you did have a duty to retreat
from your own home if the person creating
the danger is a legal resident. So
the SYG-no-retreat rule might have come into play.
By the way, I enjoy the
editorializing here, quoting a grieving mother talking about how she hated
Stand Your Ground.
Black on black violence. Both had guns. Jackson Fleurimon is the killer, and he was
granted immunity, so SYG-immunity applied.
Further, it was not in his home, so it would appear to be a
SYG-no-retreat rule applied.
But this is another case where I
don’t understand why the court thought this was self-defense and I suspect
there is something missing from the account.
There is much more there, but I will focus on just the killer’s version
of the story:
When deputies
arrived, Fleurimon stated several times, "I shot him, I shot him.'' He
said he saw Termitus, whom he knew only slightly, come out of a second floor
apartment and pull up his shirt, revealing a gun. Fleurimon said he had heard
Termitus planned to rob him. He told deputies it was "either him or me''
and said if he hadn't shot first, Termitus would have shot him.
So, he showed he had a gun, which
can even be brandishing, but it seems a little extreme to just start shooting
at that point. So that makes me suspect
there is something missing from the story.
In any case, SYG-no-retreat applied.
A black female killer of a white
male. They were boyfriend and girlfriend
and there was apparently some alleged history of domestic violence. Otherwise the case is pending, so I will not
comment further, except she has been charged with a crime, and the immunity
hearing is scheduled.
Black male on black male
violence. Yes, you read that right, the
victim is a man named “Nikita.” Both men
were armed. Since he was not charged,
SYG-immunity didn’t apply, and since he was engaged in illegal activity (drug
dealing), SYG-no-retreat did not apply, either.
And indeed if you read the facts it sounds like a gangster v. gangster
shootout in a club (so not at home) with witnesses afraid to come forward,
though one can’t be certain.
The killer is Tavarious China
Smith. Remember that name, because it
will come up again.
White male shoots a black
male. Both had guns. Basically, Damian Niemeyer said he saw three
men trying to steal his motorcycle. He
called the police and yelled at them.
One of the three shot up at him in the apartment above. Neimeyer got his own gun and shot back,
killing Young. He was not even
charged. So he seemed to have benefitted
from the SYG-No-Retreat rule.
(Old) Hispanic male stabs black
male with an icepick. The victim was
unarmed. Alcisviades Polanco cut off
Adelson in traffic, they stopped and started arguing, got into a fight and in
the process Polanco stabbed him to death.
Polanco stated that at one point Adelson was choking him. Since they were rolling around on the ground,
it actually isn’t clear that SYG-no-retreat was necessary. So I will chalk that up as a “maybe”
SYG-no-retreat case. After all, you only
have a duty to retreat if you can do so safely.
Polanco was not charged, and therefore there was no need for
SYG-immunity.
A black male killed by an
allegedly white male named... Anup Patel.
Names are no guarantee of ethnicity, of course, but given their mistakes
in the past, I will suspect that he is actually of South Asian descent.
Anyway, Patel owned a convenience
store and was sleeping there when Carroll broke in and he shot him. Patel was not even charged with a crime.
They did not believe that Patel
could have retreated, so really this is not a SYG-no-retreat case. And since he wasn’t charged, it wasn’t a
SYG-immunity case, either. So SYG
doesn’t seem to have been involved at all.
Hispanic male killed by white
guy. James Combee may or may not have
been concerned that Gomez was hurting a girl at a party and tried to pull Gomez
off of her. Gomez shoved him, so Combee
shot him three times.
Combee’s lawyer at one point
urged that his client acted in self-defense, but Combee ended up pleading no contest
to manslaughter. So there was no
SYG-immunity. But SYG-retreat seems to
have been involved.
Alleged white male on white male
violence. The killer was named Jack
Davis, and this is what the victim looked like.
I suspect our society
would construct him as “white,” but I felt you should make
up your own mind on that. Anyway, Munoz
was unarmed, Davis had a gun. And Davis
himself was only fourteen years old.
From this news
report, and the Tampa Bay Times database, this is what happened. Munoz is deaf and he was trying to steal a
WaveRunner. Davis and his mother learned
this was happening and they pointed the gun at him. According to them, they told him to stop and
they believed he was reaching for a black item they thought might be a
gun. It turned out to be a device
designed to help steal the Runner. So
their story appears to be that because the guy was deaf, but they didn’t know
it, he didn’t understand their commands to freeze and they freaked out and shot
him. Munoz wasn’t innocent, but you
could still call this a tragic misunderstanding due to his disability.
So that would not seem to
implicate SYG-immunity, but it would implicate SYG-no-retreat.
This is a native American, Justin
Campos, killing a Hispanic man and an alleged white man named Juan Miguel
Sanchez-Perdomo who looked like this…
So once again you can judge
whether society would construct him as “white” or “Hispanic.”
In any case, Campos and friends
were leaving a strip club when they got into an argument. A friend of Campos started pistol-whipping
one of them. The gun went flying and
then Campos grabbed it and ran the other group off with it. Then some of them came back, and Juan Miguel
Sanchez-Perdomo punched a friend of Campos and Campos shot him. Then Carlos Deleon-Ortiz was running toward
the fight and Campos shot him, too.
In any case, he claimed
SYG-immunity and was denied. He claimed
self-defense, and since it was a public place, the SYG-no-retreat rule would be
relevant, but he still was found guilty.
The fact there was surveillance
video of the shooting probably played a key role in that.
This is black on black
violence. Both men had guns. Basically Danford tried to rob Timothy
Lavorne Johnson outside a store, pointing a gun at him. Johnson had a friend with him and that friend
ran on foot. Danford got in his car and
appeared to chase his friend. Johnson
got into his car, where he had an illegal gun, and chased them both. Danford and some co-conspirators blocked his
car and Danford drew his gun. Johnson
shot first and then fled the scene.
He was not even charged with any
crimes related to the killing, so SYG-immunity didn’t apply.. He did plead guilty illegal gun possession.
But you know by now, illegal gun
possession negates the SYG-no-retreat rule.
White man kills two unarmed white
men with a gun. Basically the men were
fighting two (Joel and James Kun) on one.
If the killer, Jason Clair, had shot them at that time, he might have
had a decent self-defense claim. Instead
he fled the scene and then came back with a pistol and shot them dead. The report makes no suggestion that at that
time the two men posed any threat, but this
one fills in a few more details:
The state told
jurors Clair was upset he lost a fight, went to his truck and grabbed a gun,
then went back toward the bar to pursue the victims.
Prosecutors said
that when Clair was punched by one of the victims, he pulled out the gun and
opened fire, striking each victim multiple times, even firing after the victims
were on the ground.
“If somebody's
laying on the ground, bleeding to death, it can't be self-defense,” the
prosecutor said.
But defense attorney
Robert Larr argued it was self-defense, and Clair feared for his life and was
firing blind because of the beating he took.
And if you go to the link, you
will see pictures of him. He was pretty
badly beaten, at least in the first round.
So his self-defense claim wasn’t laughable.
But it was denied. He was found guilty of first degree
murder. So he attempted to obtain SYG
immunity and failed, and attempted to invoke the SYG-no-retreat rule and
failed.
White on white violence, an
unarmed man shooting an armed one. In
fact it was a case of cousin (Willard "Joey" McCullen Jr) shooting a
cousin (Lively). I am frankly at a loss
to understand what in these facts made McCullen think he could plea
self-defense:
Willard J. McCullen
shot his cousin after a dispute over $60. According to the victim's mother,
McCullen shot him in the back and then again in the chest when he turned
around. McCullen told investigators he was an NRA member and knew he had a
right to shoot.
I love the editorializing, there. Anyway, that was so scant that I tried to
search out more information on the incident and couldn’t find it.
In any case, it was not in the
shooter’s home, but near it, it appears to be a failed attempt to invoke the
SYG-no-retreat rule. But there doesn’t
appear to have been any SYG-immunity hearing at all. He was found guilty of murder and sentenced
to thirty five years in prison. Which
seems low, all being considered.
Another case of white on white
violence, involving the stabbing by James Behanna of an unarmed Mears. Mears was upset and came to a lawfirm owned
by Behanna’s wife. Behanna first drove
him off with a shovel, then pursued Mears.
Mears then allegedly tried to choke Behanna who then stabbed him with a
pocket knife.
There is an eyewitness, who
contradicts this account.
He was initially found guilty of
manslaughter and sentenced to fifteen years in prison, but he won an
appeal. Before a new trial, he pled
guilty and was given 42 months of probation.
The problem is that it seems
doubtful that this was a SYG-no-retreat rule case at all. If you read the appellate opinion, Behanna
claimed that Mears was literally choking him as he stabbed. So his official story was that he was being
held in place and couldn’t run. There is
some dispute about the story, but that was the defense offered. So much like the Zimmerman case, even if
there was a duty to retreat, his version
of events was he couldn’t retreat.
And if you didn’t believe his version of events, then one was almost
forced to believe it was manslaughter at the least.
Was his defense successful? He
had to plead guilty to manslaughter, but he served no time. An innocent man might plead to that just to
avoid the risk of a second conviction.
But in the end he was not
pleading that he had a right to “stand his ground.” Instead he pled that he couldn’t’ retreat if
he wanted to. So I don’t think this is a
proper SYG-no-retreat case.
On the other hand, he did try and
fail to get SYG-immunity.
White on white violence, an
unarmed Pignataro being stabbed to death by Howard Strickland. Basically Strickland was hosting a party with
his girlfriend and for some reason Pignataro allegedly slapped her. They got into a fight and Strickland stabbed
Pignataro in the abdomen and he died.
This was technically outside
their home so, the SYG-no-retreat rule would have applied. Also he sought and was denied
SYG-immunity. He ultimately pled guilty
to aggravated battery. That suggests they
hoped to convict him of manslaughter or worse, and this was a compromise plea. So like the last case, it is hard to chalk up
as a clear win or loss for self-defense and SYG-no-retreat.
This was a black man (Bartholomew
Letthand), killing one black man (Terry White), injuring a second black man
(Marquez White), and injuring a white guy (Selsor). This is another case where it is hard to
understand why he even thought he could plead self-defense. Basically he had an argument with his
girlfriend. Her sons, the White
brothers, appeared to be vandalizing the car.
I don’t know of any state in the union where you can shoot a person for
that, but that is what he allegedly did.
I read several accounts and none of them contain a hint of danger before
he shot.
Then he went to the home of
another of his girlfriend’s kids and that child’s grandfather, Selsor was
there. So they argued and then Letthand
shot him in the head.
Since none of this occurred in
Letthand’s own home, the SYG-No-Retreat rule would apply, but those facts
suggests that a jury just didn’t believe that first he felt threatened by the
White brothers, and then coincidentally felt threatened by Selsor. I suppose it is possible, but it does seem
unlikely.
Black on black violence, but it
is a pending case. It is also unusual
because the (alleged) killer stabbed the victim with scissors, resulting in
death. Otherwise, I feel the facts are
presently too much up in the air right now.
One thing that is interesting,
however, is that there was apparently a SYG-immunity hearing, and if this document from Talk
Left is to be believed, the judge applied
the wrong legal standard. The judge
said that the defendant acted to save his own life, when the defendant might
have also been justified in acting if it was necessary to prevent great bodily
injury.
That order was issued in February
of last year and the trial is still pending... I wonder if there is an
interlocutory appeal seeking a mandamus against the judge, forcing him to run
the hearing again, applying the correct standard? Would that explain the delay?
Another black on black incident
and another pending case. Or so I
thought, until I started looking into it.
In fact, the killer, Timothy Davis Sr., was
acquitted. And yes, that means a
father shot his own son and the court found at least that the state couldn’t
prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was in self-defense.
Needless to say the mistake in
the database is troubling.
In any case, what happened was
that he got into a brawl with his son, and then went to his car to get his
gun. A former police officer, the elder
Davis claimed he only fired a warning shot, but in fact hit his son, twice.
And truly the whole story is full of heartbreak, the
son telling the police not to arrest his father, just before he died in the
hospital and so on.
Since he could have very easily
retreated and this was outside of the house, this was a SYG-no-retreat
case. But there is no suggestion I have
seen that he sought SYG-immunity.
Well, the confusion over
ethnicity is writ large here, because the ethnicity of DeJesus is listed as “unknown”
and no picture is provided. The killer was
a black man, Jordan Beswick. Unarmed
victim, the killer armed with a gun. The
Tampa Bay Times article didn’t explain the facts very well, but combined with this
article we got a pretty solid picture of events.
Basically DeJesus was a burglar
breaking into Beswick’s home. Beswick
fired several times and missed. DeJesus
fled into one of the bedrooms. So far it
sounds like a very obvious case of self-defense.
So then Beswick left his house
and came around to outside the ground floor bedroom window. DeJesus then tries to leave through the
window and Beswick shot him to death.
The prosecution saw this as
Beswick ambushing an unarmed man. But
Beswick argued that he didn’t know how many intruders there were or if they had
guns of their own.
He was initially charged, but
those charges were dismissed.
So that seems like a pretty
obvious SYG-no-retreat rule. He was not
in his house when he fired that last set of shots. But there was no attempt to seek
SYG-Immunity.
A white on white incident,
unarmed victim, stabbed by Shawn Harshall.
No, that is not a typo.
There were no living witnesses
but the killer. Basically they had a
series of arguments, and then decided to go to a hotel room where they were
sharing a room for work. Harshall
claimed Huffman threatened to kill him and threw him down on his bed, so he
grabbed a steak knife and stabbed him to death.
Harshall was not even charged.
Since this was neither man’s
home, SYG-no-retreat applied, although the situation makes it doubtful that
retreat was possible anyway (read especially here). But we’ll count it as a SYG-no-retreat case. There is no suggestion that he sought
SYG-immunity.
This one is pretty frustrating. Black on black, the killer, Leon T. Cooper,
had a gun. We have no idea if his victim
was armed. He claimed self-defense, but
there are literally no details of the case.
You have to look on the checkboxes below to know if it is even on his
own property (it wasn’t) implicating a SYG-no-retreat rule. And there is no hint that he sought
SYG-immunity. He ultimately pled guilty
and served ten years for manslaughter, which I suspect means he must’ve pled to
something less than what the police says he did, suggesting that the state did
not get all of what it wanted. That
means it might have been a partial victory for Cooper.
Another black on black
incident. The killer, Tony Hayward, had
a gun. His victim was unarmed. It was amusingly difficult to try to find
information about the case because apparently that is the name of the CEO for
BP and we all remember how that company was in the news a few years ago.
In any case, it appears that
Hayward and his father were working very late into the evening when a man
approached asking if they were straight, which allegedly meant if they had
drugs to sell. Then both men saw the man
reach into his coat as though to grab something. Hayward believed he was reaching for a gun, even
claimed to have seen it, so he drew his and shot.
There is some question of whether
the SYG-no-retreat rule even mattered, because he said he acted in part to
protect his father, making the ability to retreat potentially more dicey. So that will count as a maybe. There is no suggestion he sought
SYG-immunity.
And it’s off topic, but I also
see that Hayward was involved in a prior shooting, but those charges were
dismissed. I can see that they then re-filed
those charges, but I haven’t been able to figure out what the resolution of
those charges were. They seemed bound
and determined to lock the guy up.
White on white violence, with an
unarmed victim and a killer, William T. Wilkerson, Jr., using a gun.
Basically Wilkerson was at a
party and started flirting with Payne’s girlfriend. Payne asked him to leave and he did. Some claim he flashed his gun and threatened
to kill Payne as he left. As he was
getting in his truck to go, Payne followed him and punched
out his driver’s side window, as he was in the truck. At that point, Wilkerson pulled out his gun
and shot Payne.
He was acquitted of murder but
according to the Palm
Beach Post “[h]e later was convicted of a lesser charge of discharging a
firearm from a vehicle and sentenced to four years in prison.”
This would be a SYG-no-retreat
case, but no suggestion of a SYG-immunity.
But it doesn’t seem to be a complete win for self-defense, because the
mixed verdict makes almost no sense.
We have another person labeled as
“white” but with a Spanish surname. The
killer is a Hispanic woman, named Yajaira Jimenez-Castillo. It starts off sounding like a pretty good
case of self-defense. She was fifteen
years old. Both were armed with knives
and she claimed that he had attempted to rape her, pulling a knife. She took the knife from him and stabbed
him...
...seventy-four times. That’s where apparently her very good
self-defense claim goes awry. From an article
about the case:
Then, Circuit Judge Daniel
Sleet spoke. He recognized the crime was unsophisticated and isolated, that
Jimenez showed remorse and that the victim initiated the struggle, though he
posed no threat when she delivered the fatal blow.
By the way, if you read the
linked article, you will find out all kinds of reasons to feel even more
sympathetic to the killer, and it seems reasonable that she was given a
relatively light sentence.
For purposes of our analysis,
SYG-immunity was sought and rejected. But
since the court believed the danger had passed entirely, this had nothing to do
with a duty to retreat.
White guy on white guy violence,
and it was a killer with a gun (Michael Brady) versus an unarmed man (Boyette). Boyette and a second man were near his
property taunting him. Brady came out
and confronted them. Boyette came onto
his yard, with his hand behind his back, but the Tampa Bay Times’ account only
says he was afraid of being “hit.” In
any case, Brady shot the man dead.
This case went to a grand jury
which chose not to charge him. Since
grand juries are legendary pushovers, they must have felt the case against him
was unusually weak.
No SYG-immunity was sought
because he was not charged. Since he was
not actually in his house, SYG-no-retreat would have applied.
This case features a white
alleged killer and a black victim. I say
“alleged” because it is pending. There
was one trial already but it resulted in a hung jury and a mistrial. So as usual I will not go further in my
examination because I do not feel the facts are established, yet. I will note that SYG-immunity was already
denied once, but it is unclear if the alleged killer will get another shot at
it before the second trial.
Weirdly, and off topic, they are apparently excluding evidence
that the alleged killer allegedly called Butler the n-word. That would seem to be self-evidently
relevant.
White on white shooting, with a
killer armed with a gun (Shane Beil), and an unarmed victim. Basically Canada was attempting to steal some
lawn equipment from Beil’s home business when Beil confronted him with his gun. According to this
article Beil claimed Canada lunged at him.
Anyway, for whatever reason he was not charged.
Since this was not actually in
Beil’s dwelling, but in his yard, SYG-no-retreat would apply. Since he was not charged, SYG-immunity would not.
This is black on black violence,
with both parties being armed. The
killer, Tavarious China Smith showed up on this list before as the man who shot
Nikita Williams. This is not a
coincidence. Williams was Mitchell’s
brother, apparently seeking revenge against Smith for the first killing. Mitchell actually shot Smith twice in the arm
before he shot back, so the argument for self-defense is uniquely strong here
and it is hardly surprising that no charges were brought as a result.
Since he was not charged,
SYG-immunity was not asserted. And as
with the last time this guy was involved in a shooting, he was involved in
illegal activity. It also doesn’t appear
to be a SYG-no-retreat case for two reasons.
First, given the fact that he had already been shot twice, it casts
considerable doubt on whether Smith could have retreated. Further, this was not noted in relation to
the Williams case, but he apparently had a prior felony that prohibited him
from carrying a gun. As you know by now,
if a person is committing a crime when they defend themselves, they are required
to retreat if possible.
Incidentally, the Feds have filed
charges against him for unlawful possession of a firearm. It is hard to see how he can escape
conviction for that given that he actually used one.
Another case of white on white
violence, the killer (Timothy McTigue) having a gun and the victim (Palmer)
being unarmed. The two men had words and
fought on a dock, and then fell in the water.
Allegedly Palmer tried to drown McTigue.
Then Palmer went to get out of the water, and McTigue shot him in the
back of the head.
It is hard to understand why
McTigue thought that was necessary, although this account also said that just
before McTigue shot, Palmer
threatened him.
In any case there was no recorded
attempt to have SYG-immunity. And it is
not clear that SYG-no-retreat would apply, since he was in the water and the
other guy was on land. If he was afraid
of being struck as he tried to come out, did he have a safe retreat? But as with all marginal cases, I will assume
SYG-no-retreat applied because it might have influenced the jury’s final
decision of acquittal.
Two armed men, a black victim and
Hispanic killer, Alphonse Gallo. The men
were having an argument, and Barbour allegedly pulled a gun on Gallo. Gallo drew and shot him and a chaotic
gunfight erupted. There is some dispute
about whether all of the shots were justified, but a judge ultimately granted
SYG-immunity.
But I don’t see how, on the facts
recited by the paper, Gallo could have safely retreated if he could. It is not a duty to retreat when it is
dangerous, but if you can do so in reasonable safety. The classic example
I gave was how Han Solo could have lawfully shot Greedo first in a “retreat
rule” jurisdiction, and this doesn’t seem to be very much different. So I will not chalk this up as a
SYG-no-retreat case.
---------------------------------------
So that is it for this
grouping. Keep an eye out for the next
installment, although again, I will not give an ETA. It will be done when it is done.
---------------------------------------
* In actuality there were a few
repeats from last time. I am going
through the database for victims, and in order from youngest to oldest, and if
a guy killed two people, the database listed the same case twice. So it was more like thirty three additional
cases.
---------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
I have accused some people,
particularly Brett Kimberlin, of
reprehensible conduct. In some cases, the conduct is even
criminal. In all cases, the only justice I want is through the
appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system. I do not want to see vigilante violence
against any person or any threat of such violence. This kind of conduct is not only morally
wrong, but it is counter-productive.
In the particular case of Brett
Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him. Do not call him. Do not write him a letter. Do not write him an email. Do not text-message him. Do not engage in any kind of directed
communication. I say this in part
because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want
that to happen to him.
And for that matter, don’t go on
his property. Don’t sneak around and try
to photograph him. Frankly try not to
even be within his field of vision. Your
behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to
mention trespass and other concerns).
And do not contact his
organizations, either. And most of all, leave his family alone.
The only exception to all that is
that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with
contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might
report. And even then if he tells you to
stop contacting him, obey that request. That
this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that
a person asks you to stop and you refuse.
And let me say something
else. In my heart of hearts, I don’t
believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above. But if any of you have, stop it, and if you
haven’t don’t start.
No comments:
Post a Comment