By the CNN Wire Staff updated 9:55 PM EDT, Fri May 11, 2012
Florida woman sentenced to 20 years in controversial warning shot case
(CNN) -- Saying he had no discretion under state law, a judge sentenced a Jacksonville, Florida, woman to 20 years in prison Friday for firing a warning shot in an effort to scare off her abusive husband.
Marissa Alexander unsuccessfully tried to use Florida's controversial "stand your ground" law to derail the prosecution, but a jury in March convicted her of aggravated assault after just 12 minutes of deliberation.
The case, which was prosecuted by the same state attorney who is handling the Trayvon Martin case, has gained the attention of civil rights leaders who say the African-American woman was persecuted because of her race.
After the sentencing, Rep. Corrine Brown confronted State Attorney Angela Corey in the hallway, accusing her of being overzealous, according to video from CNN affiliate WJXT.
"There is no justification for 20 years," Brown told Corey during an exchange frequently interrupted by onlookers. "All the community was asking for was mercy and justice," she said.
Corey said she had offered Alexander a plea bargain that would have resulted in a three-year prison sentence, but Alexander chose to take the case to a jury trial, where a conviction would carry a mandatory sentence under a Florida law known as "10-20-life."
The law mandates increased penalties for some felonies, including aggravated assault, in which a gun is carried or used.
Corey said the case deserved to be prosecuted because Alexander fired in the direction of a room where two children were standing.
Alexander said she was attempting to flee her husband, Rico Gray, on August 1, 2010, when she picked up a handgun and fired a shot into a wall.
She said her husband had read cell phone text messages that she had written to her ex-husband, got angry and tried to strangle her.
She said she escaped and ran to the garage, intending to drive away. But, she said, she forgot her keys, so she picked up her gun and went back into the house. She said her husband threatened to kill her, so she fired one shot.
"I believe when he threatened to kill me, that's what he was absolutely going to do," she said. "That's what he intended to do. Had I not discharged my weapon at that point, I would not be here."
Alexander's attorneys tried to use the state law that allows people to use potentially deadly force anywhere they feel reasonably threatened with serious harm or death.
But a previous judge in the case rejected the request, saying Alexander's decision to go back into the house was not consistent with someone in fear for her safety, according to the Florida Times Union newspaper.
A jury convicted Alexander in March and Judge James Daniel denied her request for a new trial in April.
Daniel handed down the sentence Friday after an emotional sentencing hearing during which Alexander's parents, 11-year-old daughter and pastor spoke on her behalf.
Several people had to be escorted from the courtroom after breaking out singing and chanting about a perceived lack of justice in the case, but Daniel made a point to say that he had no choice under state law.
"Under the state's 10-20-life law, a conviction for aggravated assault where a firearm has been discharged carries a minimum and maximum sentence of 20 years without regarding to any extenuating or mitigating circumstances that may be present, such as those in this case," Daniel said.
Brown, the Jacksonville congresswoman, told reporters after the sentencing that the case was a product of "institutional racism."
"She was overcharged by the prosecutor. Period," Brown said. "She never should have been charged."
Brown has been more complimentary about Corey's work in the Trayvon Martin case, where her office filed second degree murder charges against neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman in the February 26 death of the unarmed African-American teen-ager.
That case provoked nationwide protests demanding Zimmerman's arrest after an initial police investigation released him under the "stand your ground" law.
Send Comments
Your comments will be added to the article that you write about, so include the article title
Today is
Marissa Alexander's Case Examples The Flaw Of The "Stand Your Ground Self Defense Law"
Since the Trayvon Martin Case started, we have discovered that the Stand Your Ground Self Defense Law is extremely flawed to the degree that it allows the Police Department to pick and choose which cases that they choose to take on.
Marissa Alexander's Case involves a woman that fires a weapon in the direction, other than the direction of her husband, in an effort to stop his attack. The Firing of the weapon, did in fact stop him from actually attacking her, but, Marissa was denied the Stand Your Ground Self Defense because the direction which she fired the gun was in the direction of her children that was somewhere in the house.
Thus, per the State Attorney Angela Corey's perspective, Marissa didn't rate the Stand Your Ground Self Defense Law, thereby allowing her attack on Marissa in a case that the jury spent a very short period of time to determine a "Guilty" charge, to be effective, forcing the judge to apply sentencing based on the criteria of the existing laws associated with fire arm crimes.
As compared to the Zimmerman's case, where Zimmerman was the one in pursuit of Trayvon Martin, which subsequently resulted in the young 17 boy being shot in the chest, but, Zimmerman was initially allowed to apply the Stand Your Ground Self Defense Law by the immediate arresting police department. Zimmerman was was eventually arrested as a result of a world wide outrage of the application of the Stand Your Ground Law in this case.
At issue with the Stand Your Ground Self Defense Law (SYGSDL) is it's inconsistency with respect to clearly defined criteria of application. The Cases above provide two instances of an attempt to apply the SYGSDL, with two different instances by two different genders, two different races, two different cities, but, no clearly defined understand as to why 1 attempt to apply SYGSDL was denied, and why 1 attempt to apply SYGSDL was initially accepted and will be the bases of the upcoming trial of Mr. Zimmerman.
The SYGSDL is a clearly flawed law, and even with all the agreed knowledgeable people who understand law..., concurrence that the law is flawed, there hasn't been any act or action by any legal body to remove the law from existence as of yet, leaving this law to be used to this day.
It's my contention that the SYGSDL was purposely designed by individuals who knew the extent of its possible applications, by the different bodies around the nation, who would have this type of law in their state. The SYGSDL is designed for flexible application, with specific understanding that abuses by a law enforcement body is possible, as well as possible abuse by a citizen is possible.
We cannot ignore the conscientious intent of the designer of the law, and the subsequent bodies who have approved this ill designed law for applications in each state that it exists.
Each Individual in each state that approves this law should be removed from their position of authority, immediately, based on their inability to prognosticate and extrapolate the possible uses of any created law that they approve for their state's use.
These people have failed in their area of responsibilities associated with required knowledge and understanding of laws and their application.
In My Opinion
ASMFMB
5/12/2012
Send Comments
Your comments will be added to the article that you write about, so include the article title
