I have a huge problem with the 'immunity for self-defense' hearings that are currently being utilized in the courts. The hearing is NOT authorized by statute, and during the hearing, the defendant must prove that they acted in self-defense. The courts are using this based upon a flawed decision by the Florida Supreme Court in State v. Peterson, which based its opinion on a similar but different Colorado Statute!!!
The intent of the legislation was to 'presume immunity for self-defense cases', and make the State prove the defendant did not act in self-defense, not the other way around. What's happening now basically nullifies the Legislature original intent.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife.
-Justice Oliver Wendel Holmes Brown v. United States, 1921
Last edited by rvrctyrngr; 11-23-2012 at 13:16..