The Last of the Fatal Cases
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 three unusual features of Florida
legislation: 1) the abolition (mostly) of the duty to retreat, which I refer to
as SYG-no-retreat, 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, and 3) a special rule that if a person is breaking into an
occupied vehicle or trying to drag a person out of one, that a person can
assume that this person is facing imminent deadly force, justifying the use of
deadly force in return, which I refer to as SYG-vehicle rule. I have been going through each case and
seeing if any of the relevant SYG doctrines apply, in order 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 one
hundred and eight of these in the last three posts, and now I will finish all
of the cases involving fatalities. I
suggest you read my prior posts first, because I am going to refer freely to my
findings there as though you had.
As I have said repeatedly, race
doesn’t actually matter, but racism does.
So the most useful definition of race is focused on the differing
treatment it is likely to inspire.
So let’s dive in again, again
naming cases by the first victim listed.
Unarmed white guy, Piovesan, shot
by white guy, Robert Peaden. The Tampa
Bay Times seems to be getting a lot wrong with this one, or at least differing
from other sources. When we compare what
they say, to articles reproduced here,
we get some critical differences.
The shooting took place in a
trailer. The Tampa Bay Times calls it
his home, but the Pensacola News Journal portrays it as a work trailer.
The Tampa Bay Times said Piovesan
“came into” the trailer and made threats.
The Pensacola News Journal said he “forced open” the door.
So we are not getting a very
clear picture of events. But the gist is
they had been arguing and somehow Piovesan entered into the trailer, which may
or may not have been his home, and started threatening him. Peaden pulled his chair away from the door
and shot Piovesan to death.
Anyway, Peaden was not charged,
so no SYG-immunity was sought. As for
SYG-no-retreat, the database claims that he couldn’t retreat, and further the
sheriff’s office felt that Stand Your Ground had nothing to do with the case. So “home” or not, SYG-no-retreat didn’t seem
to apply.
As an interesting coda, this
incident took place exactly eleven days after Stand Your Ground went into
effect.
I have always maintained,
steadfastly, that even though I believe the jury was correct to acquit George
Zimmerman, we didn’t necessarily have to believe that anyone did anything wrong. Martin may have been acting in lawful
self-defense. If the police had arrived
a few minutes sooner and had found Martin on top of Zimmerman and charged him
with assault, he might have been able to plead that Zimmerman’s actions
frightened him, justifying him in throwing the first punch.
(And that is assuming that he
threw the first punch. When we were
dealing with a criminal case we had to assume he did because you have to make
all reasonable assumptions in favor of the defendant. But we were always dealing with an evidence
problem. One of the witnesses to the
event was dead. Who can say what the
evidence might have looked like if Trayvon Martin was alive?)
The point is that self-defense
isn’t generally about fault. Yes,
sometimes the behavior of the people involved has some impact on the case, but
the core of the issue is the danger presented.
Even a prostitute can be raped, as one otherwise dumb jurist once said,
and logically even a prostitute can use deadly force to protect herself from
being raped.
And this case is a pretty good
illustration of this point. There is
some evidence that this is nothing more than a misunderstanding.
So basically, it was an unarmed
white guy, Clark, shot by a white woman, Marilyn Caraway. They were ex-boyfriend and girlfriend. If you believe Clark’s statements to family
before the shooting, all he wanted to do was go to his ex’s house and retrieve
a gun scope. He chose to do this,
allegedly, at about six in the morning, coming around to her sliding door. She heard a noise, saw a man’s silhouette and
shot him.
Now you might suspect that
intentions were worse on both ends. You
might suspect that she knew full well this was her ex and just felt like
shooting him. You might also suspect
that he had not just come there to get his property as this
blog speculated. In the case of the
former, the state would have to prove she had such evil intent and apparently,
it couldn’t. As for the latter, it isn’t
necessary to believe he was up to anything worse than attempting to retrieve
his property in a downright dumb way.
In any case, she was not charged,
so no SYG-immunity was sought. And since
she was defending her home, SYG-no-retreat didn’t apply either. Bluntly, this is not a Stand Your Ground
case.
Unarmed white guy, Kasbach, shot
by white guy, William Siskos. Siskos had
been dating Kasbach’s wife, but apparently the Kasbachs had chosen to attempt
to reconcile. There was an argument
between Siskos and Joe Kasbach, and Siskos claimed that Kasbach had been
striking him when he shot. So he claimed
self-defense.
The problem is the evidence
didn’t seem to back him up as indicated in this
report.
He was convicted of second degree
murder and (unlicensed) carrying of a concealed firearm. He was sentenced,
contrary to what the database says.
He did seek SYG-immunity. But you already know that the SYG-no-retreat
rule doesn’t apply, because he was engaged in illegal activity—unlawfully
concealing a firearm—when it happened.
Another white on white incident,
both armed with a gun, a woman, Myers, being shot to death by a man, Donovan
Blain Adams. Supposedly these people
were just roomates. Anyway, they had an
argument and she shot him. Then he fled
and hid under a car. When she walked by,
he ambushed her, hit her in the head with a concrete block, took her gun and
shot her to death.
He was charged but a grand jury
refused to indict.
Since he was not indicted, he had
no need to obtain SYG-immunity. And
further the database says that he couldn’t have retreated as one would suspect
when a person is shot, so SYG-immunity was irrelevant. So bluntly, I don’t see how Stand Your Ground
is involved at all.
Unarmed white guy, Standard, shot
by white man, James Conner III. The
neighbors had been feuding for months and one evening Standard threw a rock at
Conner’s car while he and his wife were in it.
It is uncertain why that was seen as sufficiently threatening, but
Conner ended up shooting him to death.
Anyway, Conner was not charged,
so no SYG-immunity hearing. It was not
in Conner’s house, so SYG-no-retreat would be in play. And the SYG-vehicle rule doesn’t apply to
someone merely damaging a vehicle from afar.
Unarmed white man, Lamar, stabbed
to death by a white woman, Laurie Lynn Bartlett. They were live-in boyfriend and
girlfriend. She initially claimed he
fell on the knife by accident, but then admitted she stabbed him, but claimed
self-defense.
She was ultimately convicted.
There is no indication that she
sought SYG-immunity. But since they both
lawfully lived there, SYG-no-retreat would have been in play.
Unarmed black guy, stabbed by
white guy, Nadim Yaqubie. The case is
pending, after bouncing up and down the appellate ladder several times. I admit the facts, if true, are amusingly
dumb, but since the case is pending, I don’t feel confident in the facts.
What we can say is that
SYG-immunity was denied and since it was in public, SYG-no-retreat
applied. Beyond that I will say no more
about this one.
Unarmed white guy, Delmonico,
beaten to death with a wooden board, by a white guy named Donald Stanley Verne. Delmonico was Verne’s landlord and the
database gives absolutely no explanation as to what theory of self-defense Verne
offered, and I couldn’t find any more information anywhere else. It simply says he beat the guy severely and
then left him to bleed, only to be found later, barely alive. Obviously he died soon after.
Verne was found guilty of murder.
Still, he did seek SYG-immunity
and was denied. Further, since Demonico
was the landlord, he had a right to be on the property, too, placing the
SYG-no-retreat rule in play.
White male v. white male
violence, an unarmed man, Ryder, stabbed by Robert Sykes. The case is pending and there is no sign he
sought immunity, so I won’t discuss this case further.
White male on white male
violence. An unarmed Pettit shot by
James Patrick Wonder. Although the case
is pending, he did seek immunity. Actually
after reading this
blog I think he had a decent case, but the judge did not grant
SYG-immunity. Since it was in a public
place and no allegation he was trapped, SYG-no-retreat was plainly in
play. But since this is a pending case,
I won’t be saying more about it.
Unarmed white male, Price, shot
by white male, Riley Finway Bryan. Bryan
was a landlord to an apartment over his garage.
Price was the tenant. Bryan had
an argument with a visitor of Price’s and it ended with Bryan shooting
price. Bryan claimed he was being
charged by Price.
Bryan was denied
SYG-immunity. Since they were both
legally present, SYG-no-retreat was in play.
Bryan was found guilty after two
trials.
Unarmed black man, Chester, shot
by white man, Dan Daley. Basically they
had an argument, Daley had been walking away when Chester ran up to them and
they fought. Daley claimed Chester
struck the first blow. This account
also adds this detail:
Daley's face
provided at least a small glimpse into what occurred. The 60-year-old man had a
large circular patch of black and blue skin around his left eye.
He said the bone
that connects his skull and jaw bone was broken. His left jaw was swollen.
He had been hospitalized for
those injuries.
So Daley was not even charged,
and thus no SYG-immunity applied. And
the database indicates retreat was not possible, so SYG-no-retreat wasn’t in
play either. Really this isn’t a Stand
Your Ground case at all.
This is an instance where I am
not sure why this guy was even charged with murder. I mean even pretending he was not acting in
self-defense, this didn’t seem to be murder.
This seemed more like a freak occurance.
Anyway, white on white violence,
this time both men unarmed. From this
account, it sounds like the killer, James Elrod was at a bar being kind of
a jerk toward some women. McCullen
stepped up to him, said this was not how to talk to women. Elrod told him mind his business but McCullen
didn’t. McCullen put his hand on Elrod’s
shoulder, and Elrod turned and punched him once, in the neck or the chest. And then Elrod left.
Little did he know that he had
dislodged a blood clot and it resulted in a stroke killing McCullen ten days
later, or so the prosecution’s theory went.
Now, let’s pretend that is true.
Still, barring some amazing showing that Elrod was some kind of master
killer with his bare hands, I don’t see how you charge him with murder. But it gets even more bogus than that. The medical examiner admitted that he wasn’t
sure that his strike dislodged the blood clot, that literally anything could have dislodged it. So they weren’t even sure he caused it.
And that is before we talk about
self-defense. That act by McCullen,
putting his hand on Elrod’s shoulder, sounds like something straight out of an
episode of Walker, Texas Ranger. But the moment he put his hand on his
shoulder, it was technically a battery. Read the linked statute. Under Florida law, an unauthorized touching is
technically a battery. So let’s review
the language of the self-defense
statute:
A person is
justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the
extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to
defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of
unlawful force.
Now the statutes go on to talk
about when deadly force is justified, but we can stop right there, because this
wasn’t deadly force. Here’s how the
statutes define deadly force:
The term “deadly
force” means force that is likely to cause death or great bodily harm
Now it might be possible for one
blow to cause great bodily harm.
Arguably Trayvon Martin did exactly that by breaking Zimmerman’s nose
and he might have done that in one blow.
But my default is that one empty-handed strike is unlikely to be deadly
force all by itself unless they can show his fists are almost like deadly
weapons or something.
So I am not getting why he was
charged. In any case, he had sought SYG-immunity
and it was denied. Since it was at a
bar, so SYG-retreat is in play except, according to Wayne R. LaFave and Austin
W. Scott, Jr. Criminal Law (2d Ed,
1986), the duty to retreat is never imposed for non-lethal force. So this doesn’t implicate the SYG-no-retreat
rule.
He was finally acquitted in
mid-trial, but I think the judge had trouble finding he even caused the man’s
death because of the medical examiner’s testimony.
An man allegedly armed with a
knife, of unknown racial/ethnic identity, killed back black dude, Charles Daily
Jr., with a gun. The case is pending so
I won’t say much, but SYG-immunity was sought and denied.
Unarmed white guy, Concannon,
shot by Nour Badi Jarkas, which they call “white.” As usual, my focus is on how a person is
likely to be treated. Is he likely to
benefit from favorable treatment from the good old boys? Or are they more likely to construct this
man...
...him as a middle
easterner. So I won’t step into the
debate as to whether he is “white” or not.
But the fact he belongs to a group that inspires a certain kind of
prejudice and unfair discrimination should be noted and not ignored.
Basically Jarkas went to the home
of his estranged wife. While there, he
had an argument with her current boyfriend, Concannon. Jarkas ended up shooting him. This is what the judge said about the
shooting before
she set him free:
nothing was
presented … to rebut the reasonableness of the fear that [Jarkas] testified
that he had in being confronted by a 5-foot-11, 280-pound, tattooed man who was
angry and who lunged at him,"
Part of that evidence was
testimony from the medical examiner suggesting that it was possible that the
man was lunging at him when he died.
Anyway, as I suggested, the judge
actually granted a bench acquittal. This
didn’t appear to be a SYG-immunity, and none was apparently sought. On the other hand, he was not in his home, so
SYG-no-retreat was in play.
Unarmed white guy, Tilley, shot
by a white woman, Tamra Leasure. If you
read the opinion
of the appellate court, you’ll get the picture of two people in dysfunctional
relationship. Tilley constantly
proclaimed they were engaged, Leasure seemed cool on him. But ultimately at the moment she pulled the
trigger, we have no clear idea what was happening. She claimed it was self-defense, but that was
something like the fifth story she told, and her story was not consistent with the
physical evidence. So they know she shot
him, on purpose, but no one seems to know exactly why.
In any case, she sought
SYG-immunity and it was denied. But this
was in her house and thus SYG-no-retreat had nothing to do with this.
The victims were a white woman, Gloria,
and a black man, her husband, Daniel Rodgers.
They were unarmed, and shot by Brian Broadway, a white man, who was Gloria’s
son, and Daniel’s stepson. Gloria
survived, David did not. Broadway was
living in a home owned by his mother. Gloria
and Daniel were checking in on him, opening the door with their key, and he
claimed he mistook them for burglars. What
seems to have happened is that the typical homestead immunity was denied. This article suggests
that it was because his mother was technically the owner, which does track with
the statutory language. There is also
the fact he isn’t supposed to possess a gun, meaning he was engaged in unlawful
activity. Either way, instead of
enjoying an unrebuttable presumption he was protecting his own life, Broadway
instead had to prove the danger to himself.
So he did seek SYG-immunity and
was denied. And SYG-no-retreat was in
play.
And yes, he was convicted, even
though his own mother spoke in his defense.
(Old) White male, Watts, armed with
a knife and arguably a car, shot to death by a (young) black man, Corey Lindsey
Jr. The case is pending so little
comment, but I will note that SYG-immunity was sought and denied, and
SYG-no-retreat might have been in play.
An unarmed man of unknown descent,
Gilhousen, shot by a white man, Cifford Eugene Van Dyke. The two men were brothers-in-law. There had been a history of Gilhousen beating
up Van Dyke, even threatening to kill him prior to the shooting. They seemed to believe some of the shots
themselves were justified as we have seen in previous cases, but the last shot
involved him approaching the man and shooting him on the ground.
SYG-immunity was denied. Since this was in his backyard, SG-no-retreat
applied.
He was convicted but sentenced to
a minimum term.
Unarmed white guy, Joseph,
stabbed to death with a knife by John Orr, a white man. The case is pending, but SYG-immunity was sought
and rejected, and it was in a public space, so SYG-no-retreat would be at play.
Elderly, unarmed black man,
Johnson, shot to death by elderly black woman, Ernestine Broxsie. Johnson was a tenant at renting out Broxsie’s
mobile home. Apparently she was an
absentee landlord and she decided to stay at the residence when she was in
town. They had a fight when she accused
him of stealing from her, and it became physical. She claims she grabbed a gun and they fought
over it and it went off by accident. The
police argued that since it was a revolver, it shouldn’t have gone off twice by
accident.
You can read more details of that
claim, here, but
a judge granted her SYG-immunity and that was that. Also, the database says she couldn’t have
retreated, so it’s not a SYG-no-retreat case.
White on white violence, elderly
on elderly violence, with an unarmed Kacknick being shot to death by Richard
Fortner. It was all over a card game at
his house. Fortner
began arguing with
Marion Kachnik and eventually retrieved his gun. Fortner argued that he only
intended to make Kachnik leave but when the guest put him in a headlock, he had
no choice but to fire. The first two shots struck the 68-year-old Kachnik's
legs; the third his head.
He sought SYG-immunity, but it
was denied. If you believed his
self-defense claims, he was in a headlock, making retreat impossible.
He was convicted and sentenced to
20 years in prison. My guess is it is
the fact he shot the guy’s legs first, and then
shot him in the head, that was the problem.
Old white man, Labiento, shot to
death by younger white woman, Jacqueline Galas.
Both had guns, at least at one point in the encounter.
A while back in this, I wrote:
Even a prostitute
can be raped, as one otherwise dumb jurist once said, and logically even a
prostitute can use deadly force to protect herself from being raped.
Well, this apparent prostitute,
Galas, wasn’t protecting herself from being raped, but she was worried about
being straight up murdered. Labiento was
one of her clients and apparently became so attached to her he planned a murder
suicide—he even wrote out a note describing his plans. She calmed him down enough to put down the
gun at which point she picked it up and pointed at him. He approached her and she shot. The state’s attorney’s office noted
that every time she had seen him he’d had two guns.
She was not even charged, so no
SYG-immunity was sought. Since this was
not her house, SYG-no-retreat would have been implicated.
---------------------------------------
And that, my friends, is the last
of the fatal cases and a good stopping point for this analysis. We’ll dive into the non-fatal cases next. I suspect there will be a lot of overlap so
hopefully it won’t take as long.
---------------------------------------
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.
"If the police had arrived a few minutes sooner and had found Martin on top of Zimmerman and charged him with assault, he might have been able to plead that Zimmerman’s actions frightened him, justifying him in throwing the first punch."
ReplyDeleteExcept that his continuing to beat on Zimmerman after the first punch laid him out (removing any threat) would make the self-defense claim void. You're allowed to use force to END A THREAT; if the evidence shows that you went past that, your claim will be challenged.
"My guess is it is the fact he shot the guy’s legs first, and then shot him in the head, that was the problem."
And here's a case where exactly that happened. It could have been argued that the third shot was fired as part of a series with the other two, but there may have been physical evidence that argued against that; the bullet showing it was fired from a different position or angle, for example.