race race race race

[bodecea]

I believe thats considered aggravated assault with a motor vehicle.
Not to mention, it was someone in the backseat that got shot.

Cops shoot people who are driving cars at them all the time and it's excused as self-defense against a deadly weapon.

 

[BlackSand]

I think you mean a defense to prosecution or a general defense. Affirmative defense is usually reserved for some sort of civil cause of action. Example: accord and satisfaction.

.

Good Luck ... You can take care of that nitwit from here.
Have a Lovely Evening ... Time for me to eat dinner.

.​

 

[Curried Goats]

I think you mean a defense to prosecution or a general defense. Affirmative defense is usually reserved for some sort of civil cause of action. Example: accord and satisfaction.

No. I know what I'm talking about. I even provided a link. Here, I'll even provide the relevant portion.

In criminal prosecutions, examples of affirmative defenses are self defense,[1] insanity,[2] entrapment[3] and the statute of limitations.

 

[bodecea]

The reason none of the woke articles show the damage to Wilson's vehicle is because there isn't any. Nobody tried to run him off the road. He's just another lying negro.

No racism here, folks.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No. I know what I'm talking about. I even provided a link. Here, I'll even provide the relevant portion.

No you don't.

Generally, the term "affirmative defense" is usually reserved for civil matters.

The "affirmative defense of self-defense" is a serious bit of redundancy.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No racism here, folks.

What did he say that was "racism"?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Always be aware of surroundings when using a firearm

So don't shoot because you might hit someone else, but the folks in the car are just having a good old time while you are trying to run me off the road. So what do you do in that situation? Wait to get run over or off the road.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Wrong. You don't have the presumption of innocence when you shoot someone because there is only one reasonable scenario in which shooting someone is acceptable and that's in the case of self defense or defense of others.

This can't be any more wrong.

They may have an easy time proving their case-in-chief and spend most of their time defending or trying to disprove a self-defense claim, but they have the burden to prove the crime first.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

So don't shoot because you might hit someone else, but the folks in the car are just having a good old time while you are trying to run me off the road. So what do you do in that situation? Wait to get run over or off the road.

Step on your brakes and come to a complete stop. you can't be run off the road if your car is not moving.

You assholes are trying to invent a scenario where this black dude's actions were justified. It's because he's black and so are you and you feel like your team is being attacked. Tell the truth.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

.

You are presumed innocent of a crime until you are proven guilty of a crime ... Stop lying.

That's the kind of garbage that means nothing and you are defending a vapid point.
You cannot even confess to Capital Murder and be convicted without a trail
and the Prosecution still presenting evidence you actually committed the murder.

They have to prove you did it ... At least to a Jury or Judge.

.​

In what jurisdiction do you practice? (I assume you do, based on your comments)

 

[Curried Goats]

No you don't.

Generally, the term "affirmative defense" is usually reserved for civil matters.

The "affirmative defense of self-defense" is a serious bit of redundancy.

"Affirmative Defense of self defense" is your line why did you quote it like you it was mine? I simply pointed out to the other poster that a self defense claim is an affirmative defense in that you are affirming that you killed someone and thus as responsible for proving your actions justified. Your claims to what is "generally" described is specious and without any merit from what I can see. If you want to provide evidence beyond your own insistence then let's see it.

 

[Curried Goats]

This can't be any more wrong.

They may have an easy time proving their case-in-chief and spend most of their time defending or trying to disprove a self-defense claim, but they have the burden to prove the crime first.

Claiming self defense is affirming the prosecution's claim that you killed someone and taking on the burden of proving it was justified. That's why it's called an affirmative defense. You guys are dumb.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Try shooting at a moving target. I'm sure from his point of view he was just shooting at the car to get them to stop.

Don't shoot at a moving vehicle. It all depends on the circumstances and how much/little truth there is in the guys claim. I will assume the right verdict was reached.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Claiming self defense is affirming the prosecution's claim

Moron. You can claim self-defense in the alternative. You can say both "I dindu nuffin" and "it was self-defense" at the same time. There's even required jury instructions telling jurors that they must first find the defendant committed the alleged act, then and only then are they to consider whether or not self-defense applied.



Just shut the fuck up, man you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Curried Goats]

Moron. You can claim self-defense in the alternative. You can say both "I dindu nuffin" and "it was self-defense" at the same time. There's even required jury instructions telling jurors that they must first find the defendant committed the alleged act, then and only then are they to consider whether or not self-defense applied.



Just shut the fuck up, man you don't know what you're talking about.

What are you talking about moron? It's not a buffet. You can either claim you had nothing to do with any killing in which case its the prosecution's job to prove you did kill someone.... or, you can admit to killing someone and argue you did so in self defense in which case its on you to prove that to a jury.

 

[BlackSand]

In what jurisdiction do you practice? (I assume you do, based on your comments)

.

I don't practice Law ... But my lawyer has told me that I might be a better lawyer than he is.
I live in Louisiana also ... So, I would have the whole Napoleonic Code thing going on as well when it comes to Civil Law.

.​

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

What are you talking about moron? It's not a buffet. You can either claim you had nothing to do with any killing in which case its the prosecution's job to prove you did kill someone.... or, you can admit to killing someone and argue you did so in self defense in which case its on you to prove that to a jury.

You absolutely have no clue what you're talking about.

A criminal defendant is never limited in the defense claims he can launch.

You are fucking talking right out of your cum-stained ass. You seriously have no clue.

 

[Curried Goats]

You absolutely have no clue what you're talking about.

A criminal defendant is never limited in the defense claims he can launch.

You are fucking talking right out of your cum-stained ass. You seriously have no clue.

You can choose to claim both that you had nothing to do with someone's death and then change your story midway through trial to admitting that you did and trying to argue self defense, but I don't think the changing story is going to help your defense much.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You can choose to claim both that you had nothing to do with someone's death and then change your story midway through trial to admitting that you did and trying to argue self defense, but I don't think the changing story is going to help your defense much.

You're pretty simple minded. I can see why you cannot grasp the concept, but let me explain.

You can make the prosecutors prove guilt and the jury can decide guilt, but you can also claim that even if true, it was self-defense and present evidence to corroborate that defense.

When a jury deliberates, they are given a "charge" which is a document drafted by all attorneys and the judge, usually in chambers, which gives the jury instructions and allows the jury to answer certain questions.

Example:

Do you find the defendant shot and killed the 14-year-old victim?

If the jury answers "NO" it's over.

BUT

After that question you'll get something like this:

Do you find that the defendant acted in self-defense? (then a reference to the definition above in the instructions)

 

[OKTexas]

Hmmm.... that's not what you claimed in your last post.....

Glad I could help clear this up for you though.

Did you even bother to read the OP? This quote is the exact situation I described. Now why don't you stick your foot in your mouth again and tell everyone how undistracted you'd be, trying to shoot at a moving vehicle, from a moving vehicle, while someone was supposedly trying to run you off the fucking road. You're not just stupid, you're a fucking idiot.

Wilson, a biracial Black man, 21 years old at the time of the shooting on June 14, 2020, fired his legal handgun at a pickup truck of white teens who he says were yelling racial slurs at him and trying to run him and his white girlfriend off the road near Statesboro, Ga.

.