Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, August 24, 2019

The man accused of shooting a Florida father in front of his family in an argument over a handicap parking space outside a convenience store has been found guilty of manslaughter.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"Just hours after gunning Markeis McGlockton down, Drejka told detectives he opened fire when the unarmed man shoved him to the ground and took one step toward him, a scenario that appears to go against a security video showing the victim step back when he saw the suspect pull a firearm."

Have a good time in prison, ashhole!!

#1 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-08-24 02:19 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Good. the petty things that people will kill another human being over are ridiculous.

#2 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-24 11:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Stand your ground is a stupid law passed by stupid NRA supporters.

#3 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-24 11:52 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 7

#3 When this first happened, I asked Danni if this part of Fla was sensible enough to convict. She said yes. Good call, Danni.

One quibble: This guy didn't actually use the SYG statue as part of his defense, right? Didn't he use a straight self-defense strategy?

#4 | Posted by Karabekian at 2019-08-24 12:17 PM | Reply

Shoulda got George Zimmerman's lawyer.

#5 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-08-24 02:33 PM | Reply

Shooter may be going to prison but the guy who got shot lost that argument.

#6 | Posted by Tor at 2019-08-24 02:42 PM | Reply

#4
yes, he did use SYG as defense.

#7 | Posted by ichiro at 2019-08-24 02:51 PM | Reply

#7. Ichiro, I just reread the article. Apparently, he was initially going to use SYG, but changed his mind before trial. Here is the pertinent section:

"Drejka, who had a permit to carry a concealed weapon when he shot McGlockton, initially invoked Florida's so-called "stand your ground" self-defense law, which went into effect in 2005. It allowed people to use lethal force if they consider their lives to be in imminent jeopardy.

But Drejka and his attorneys scrapped that argument in favor of a plain self-defense case."

#8 | Posted by Karabekian at 2019-08-24 03:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#8

Shouldn't "stand your ground" literally mean you're acting in "self defense"?

I'm not sure what it means that they dropped the SYG defense and went with a plain self defense case.

Is SYG better or worse legally?

#9 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-08-24 03:13 PM | Reply

#9. I don't get it, either. I guess "self-defense" is covered under ordinary statutes about such things. SYG is a statute unto itself. That's the statute Zimmerman used. I'm not sure why this guy's team made the switch. Maybe one of the DR lawyers can help us to understand it, if any of them are sober; it IS a Saturday afternoon, after all. ;)

#10 | Posted by Karabekian at 2019-08-24 03:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

Maybe one of the DR lawyers can help us to understand it, if any of them are sober; it IS a Saturday afternoon, after all. ;)

Mimosas at brunch can be dangerous.

#11 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-08-24 03:26 PM | Reply

The 2019 Florida Statutes
Title XLVI
CRIMES
Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
View Entire Chapter
776.012Use or threatened use of force in defense of person."
(1)A person is justified in using or threatening to use 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. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such force.
(2)A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.

--define "great bodily harm". had this man not already received "great bodily harm"?
i see in the video the "attacker" definitely keep coming after the assualt; when he sees the gun then he backs up.
i see the shooter point the weapon at two people... how many people are involved here, was the shooter alone?
would an average person having just been blind-sided and viciously knocked to the ground... would that victim's mind be expected to parse his/her continuing danger?

indeed, when exactly he pulled the trigger may be problematic. from what i see and i oppose syg, ... this man could not have retreated, he as pushed to the ground.

i could not convict this man of manslaughter without knowing the punishment. he was violently attacked and yes the attacker stepped TOWARD him before he stepped away.

#12 | Posted by ichiro at 2019-08-24 03:53 PM | Reply

correcting myself #7:
Camareno said he and Drejka's other lawyers ultimately used a self-defense argument rather than Florida's stand-your-ground law specifically, not wanting their client to have to testify at a pretrial hearing. But Drejka's initial stand-your-ground claim and Pinellas Sheriff Bob Gualtieri's reference to the statute when he declined to arrest Drejka last year renewed scrutiny of a law that lets people react with deadly force before trying to back away if they have a reasonable belief their lives are at risk.
Florida legislators doubled down on the measure in 2017, placing the burden of disproving a stand-your-ground defense on prosecutors.

--*apparently* the conviction rest on when, in the alleged 3 seconds from when he drew the weapon, to when he pulled the trigger.
meaning, he's knocked violently down to asphalt and sees the giy still coming; he apoarently knows he's outnumbered because he points the weapon twice each at two different people.
perhaps he had a moment when he might have gained clarity... perhaps not.

i think manslaughter is appropriate, but not much time, if any.

#13 | Posted by ichiro at 2019-08-24 04:03 PM | Reply

had the man got up and beat the crap out of the guy who assualted him possibly causing "great bodily injury"... would you convict?

#14 | Posted by ichiro at 2019-08-24 04:06 PM | Reply

I have no idea what the authors are trying to say but will offer my oft stated admonition; never, ever, rely on journalists to accurately report of legal matters.

Chapter 776.012(2) of the Florida Statutes a typical use of deadly force statute. The first sentence provides a person may use deadly force when the person reasonably believes that force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury. The second sentence sets for that the person has no duty to retreat before such use of force i.e. stand your ground. www.leg.state.fl.us

#15 | Posted by et_al at 2019-08-24 04:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

i just heard the judge would not allow defendant to testify?

#16 | Posted by ichiro at 2019-08-24 04:21 PM | Reply

there's a still image s rolling down in this article:
abcnews.go.com

you can see Drejka pointing his weapon at his attacker... does it look like the attacker is retreating?

#17 | Posted by ichiro at 2019-08-24 04:43 PM | Reply

Good. the petty things that people will kill another human being over are ridiculous.

#2 | Posted by SheepleSchism

The president you defend every day has chosen to kill thousands of people to protect coal and oil profits.

#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-24 04:53 PM | Reply

Self-Defense vs SYG
Before 'stand your ground' became law in Florida, a person had the right to defend his or her home under something known as the Castle Doctrine. Inside your home, you had no 'duty to retreat' before using deadly force against what you believed to be imminent deadly force. Which meant outside the four walls of your "castle," you did have a 'duty to retreat' or an obligation to try to diffuse the situation or get away from it before resorting to force.

#19 | Posted by ichiro at 2019-08-24 04:53 PM | Reply

"The president you defend every day has chosen to kill thousands of people to protect coal and oil profits.

#18 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY "

As did the one before him and the one before him. Your point other than you tell only half truths??

#20 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-24 04:57 PM | Reply

corr: assault AND battery.

under Self-defense outside (not Castle) in public, ...

In a physical confrontation, self defense typically allows a person who reasonably believes he is about to be hit to defend himself. However, if you've already been hit, and the person who hit you indicates by words or actions that he is not going to hit you again, self defense generally does not allow you to hit that person back. Self defense may only be invoked to prevent further harm, not to retaliate against a person who has already harmed you.

Proportional Response

Self defense also only allows for a proportional response. This means that if someone hits you with his fist, you may not necessarily be justified in pulling out a gun and shooting him.

Generally, deadly force may only be used in circumstances in which the person using deadly force has a reasonable fear of losing his or her life.

#21 | Posted by ichiro at 2019-08-24 05:02 PM | Reply

anyway, this is why we have juries.
JURORS

#22 | Posted by ichiro at 2019-08-24 05:06 PM | Reply

...JURORS ARE THE LAW IN A COURTROOM.
fija.org<>

#23 | Posted by ichiro at 2019-08-24 05:08 PM | Reply

The perp started out by playing parking enforcer and yelling at the victims wife with kid in the car..enough to get shoved to the ground.

His second mistake was firing at an unarmed man.. hard to convince me your life was in danger from 5_10 feet away

I would have voted to convict.

#24 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2019-08-24 05:37 PM | Reply

Shooter may be going to prison but the guy who got shot lost that argument.

You act like he didnt shove the guy to the ground. Maybe the lesson here is you cannot just lay your hands on someone you are having a disagreement with, something the black community is all to quick to do. The threat of violence doesnt equal the attainment of respect.

#25 | Posted by boaz at 2019-08-24 11:08 PM | Reply

His second mistake was firing at an unarmed man.. hard to convince me your life was in danger from 5_10 feet away

Especially when he pulled the gun as the man was retreating on the video.

#26 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-08-25 06:30 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort