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.
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.
Post a Comment