Doesn't this seem like double jeapordy?
0
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=520280
I was reading this thread on my fav gun forum. A guy tries to get photos of his wife cheating on him to use in future divorce proceedings. She tries to run him over with her car. He shoots in self defense, wounding her leg (how the hell does that work unless he was hip-firing?). Long story short, he's acquitted of criminal charges but is found civilly liable and has to now pay her $49,000 + legal.
Let's set aside the actual scenario and look at the legal ramification. I don't quite understand why our justice system is structured this way. You can be found innocent of any crime, not guilty, poof, free! And then you can be right back in court and found guilty of the same crime and be paying someone alot of money for a loooooong time. I know that the reasonable doubt requirement is alot lower in civil court than criminal, I just don't get why.
I was reading this thread on my fav gun forum. A guy tries to get photos of his wife cheating on him to use in future divorce proceedings. She tries to run him over with her car. He shoots in self defense, wounding her leg (how the hell does that work unless he was hip-firing?). Long story short, he's acquitted of criminal charges but is found civilly liable and has to now pay her $49,000 + legal.
Let's set aside the actual scenario and look at the legal ramification. I don't quite understand why our justice system is structured this way. You can be found innocent of any crime, not guilty, poof, free! And then you can be right back in court and found guilty of the same crime and be paying someone alot of money for a loooooong time. I know that the reasonable doubt requirement is alot lower in civil court than criminal, I just don't get why.
0
... How the hell did He shot her in the Leg, when She is Inside a Car, trying to run over him?
... Also, who the hell tries to stop a car with a gun? Ever heard of the "HOLY SHIT SHE'S DRIVING A CAR AGAINST YOU, RUN THE FUCK AWAY" solution? I mean, it's like trying to stop a wrecking ball with your fist, except you also wore iron knuckles.
I dunno, something smells fishy.
... Also, who the hell tries to stop a car with a gun? Ever heard of the "HOLY SHIT SHE'S DRIVING A CAR AGAINST YOU, RUN THE FUCK AWAY" solution? I mean, it's like trying to stop a wrecking ball with your fist, except you also wore iron knuckles.
I dunno, something smells fishy.
0
As much as I tried to put logic to make any sense of what happened, nothing seemed to work. Like Ethil pointed, I tried to visualize someone being shot in the leg while in a car by someone who was about to be run over by said car. This literally seems virtually impossible. In fact the most common human response would be to run away or get out of the way, then shoot the person in the car. But it's not something where I can say, "It's a damn setup!". You just gotta love weird cases like these and how our "judicial" system deals with it.
0
He WAS ACQUITTED two years ago.
The charges filed, resulting in the verdict yesterday, are bullshit, and unconstitutional.
The charges filed, resulting in the verdict yesterday, are bullshit, and unconstitutional.
0
Ethil wrote...
... How the hell did He shot her in the Leg, when She is Inside a Car, trying to run over him? ... Also, who the hell tries to stop a car with a gun? Ever heard of the "HOLY SHIT SHE'S DRIVING A CAR AGAINST YOU, RUN THE FUCK AWAY" solution? I mean, it's like trying to stop a wrecking ball with your fist, except you also wore iron knuckles.
I dunno, something smells fishy.
Or they could be Mr. and Mrs. Smith.
0
Nashrakh wrote...
Oh, one of THOSE threads again.Ahem, people, please go back and look at the SECOND paragraph in my original post.
0
Ethil wrote...
... How the hell did He shot her in the Leg, when She is Inside a Car, trying to run over him? ... Also, who the hell tries to stop a car with a gun? Ever heard of the "HOLY SHIT SHE'S DRIVING A CAR AGAINST YOU, RUN THE FUCK AWAY" solution? I mean, it's like trying to stop a wrecking ball with your fist, except you also wore iron knuckles.
I dunno, something smells fishy.
a ricochet. was probaly aiming for her cheast or upper body hit just under the windshield were the metal and dashbored is and the angle changed hitting her in the leg.
0
Its not double jeopardy if this went from federal to civil court.
To give you an example: OJ Simpson was found innocent in federal court, but guilty in civil court. Thats why he had to pay that huge fine.
I didn't really bother to read the article though.
To give you an example: OJ Simpson was found innocent in federal court, but guilty in civil court. Thats why he had to pay that huge fine.
I didn't really bother to read the article though.
0
Harmonian wrote...
Its not double jeopardy if this went from federal to civil court.To give you an example: OJ Simpson was found innocent in federal court, but guilty in civil court. Thats why he had to pay that huge fine.
I know it's not double jeopardy, but it still seems like these kinds of cases just aren't fair.
0
trekki859 wrote...
Ethil wrote...
... How the hell did He shot her in the Leg, when She is Inside a Car, trying to run over him? ... Also, who the hell tries to stop a car with a gun? Ever heard of the "HOLY SHIT SHE'S DRIVING A CAR AGAINST YOU, RUN THE FUCK AWAY" solution? I mean, it's like trying to stop a wrecking ball with your fist, except you also wore iron knuckles.
I dunno, something smells fishy.
a ricochet. was probaly aiming for her cheast or upper body hit just under the windshield were the metal and dashbored is and the angle changed hitting her in the leg.
Sounds as likely as me doing a Hadoken from my penis, to quote Sisami and Nash.
0
Well I remember seeing on CNN that there was a farmer who shot the 2 thieves trying to steal his car and killed one of them by shooting through the windshield... and he got off free of charge because its self defense. wth happened here?
0
It's all in the jargan. leagal mumbo jumbo. some how pleading no contest is better than pleading guilty. contesting a speeding ticket may get it reduced to a lesser charge like faliure to obey a flagman. where the hell did a flagman come from?
i guess my answer in short would be:
the world's a twisted place.
i guess my answer in short would be:
the world's a twisted place.
0
It's because the laws were made and structured around the idea of defending the innocent against unrightful revocation of their personal liberty.
If you get convicted of a crime like that in federal court, it's jail time.
Civil court, as far as I know, can only order that the defendant be compensated in some monetary way. It doesn't actually address crimes, it only deals with "he owes me X for Y, make him pay me"-type affairs.
I agree that it's not right. If you just spent tons of money defending yourself in court to stay out of jail time you didn't deserve, you probably don't have the money to pay when the "victim" comes a-bitching. A win in a criminal case should set precedent for a judge to be able to tell the plaintiff in the summary civil case,
"This isn't worth the court's time. Case dismissed. Get out of my courtroom, and if I see you again without a damn good reason, you'll be compensating the court for the time you've wasted out of your own pocket."
If you get convicted of a crime like that in federal court, it's jail time.
Civil court, as far as I know, can only order that the defendant be compensated in some monetary way. It doesn't actually address crimes, it only deals with "he owes me X for Y, make him pay me"-type affairs.
I agree that it's not right. If you just spent tons of money defending yourself in court to stay out of jail time you didn't deserve, you probably don't have the money to pay when the "victim" comes a-bitching. A win in a criminal case should set precedent for a judge to be able to tell the plaintiff in the summary civil case,
"This isn't worth the court's time. Case dismissed. Get out of my courtroom, and if I see you again without a damn good reason, you'll be compensating the court for the time you've wasted out of your own pocket."