Florida man freed under stand-your- ground defence shot dead in Miami

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Guardian

Florida man freed under stand-your- ground defence shot dead in Miami

Police say Greyston Garcia, who stabbed a burglar to death in March but was cleared of murder, was innocent victim of gang shooting

Richard Luscombe in Miami
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 27 June 2012 12.52 EDT

A Florida man who was controversially cleared of murder under the same stand-your-ground law that is central to the Trayvon Martin case has been shot dead.

In March, Greyston Garcia, 25, was granted immunity by a Miami judge who ruled he acted in self-defence even though he chased a burglar for more than a block before stabbing him to death.

The case attracted attention because of its similarities to the Martin case in Sanford in February, in which George Zimmerman shot and killed the unarmed Martin, 17.

Zimmerman was initially freed without charge under the 2005 law, which allows for deadly force if a person fears his life is in danger, but later charged with second-degree murder.


Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/27/florida-stand-your-ground

[Speck Tater]

1. Karma's a bitch. nt

[RebelOne]

29. Yup. what goes around comes around. n/t

[-..__...]

44. Hopefully, karma will catch up with the gang-banging shit-stains...

responsible for the double homicides.

[bowens43]

2. As you sow so shall you reap nt

[slackmaster]

3. He might as well have let that punk-ass burglar finish him off

In March, Greyston Garcia, 25, was granted immunity by a Miami judge who ruled he acted in self-defence even though he chased a burglar for more than a block before stabbing him to death.

The burglar wouldn't have run if he had nothing to hide.

[Comrade Grumpy]

6. It's stand your ground, not chase 'em down.

If this guy had been convicted as he should have been, he'd probably still be alive today. Oh, well.

[Scurrilous]

7. "It's stand your ground, not chase 'em down."

ROFL

[Hoyt]

12. That is good.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

24. I don't know if it's ROFL material but it is accurate and succinct. n/t

[freshwest]

54. Perfect

[bongbong]

17. Good phrase!

I like it, although the real name of SYG is "Murder anybody you hate for FREE!"

[EC]

30. But why did Garcia have to chase him?

If it were me I'd have just called the cops and got myself somewhere safe, after he ran. Why would anyone go after the burglar?

[csziggy]

48. After he stabbed the guy, he kept the bags of stolen radios

The burglar was trying to get away with.

If I'd been on a jury, that would sound like a motive to murder to me!

[Egalitarian Thug]

46. I like the SYG laws, they're an inevitable solution to stupid. It's just too bad that the

morons that think risking your life over stuff have usually already spawned.

[Drale]

4. Karma

Karma will get you sooner or later, for this guy it came sooner.

[VTX]

36. Sooner

and came even sooner for the burgler..

[jwirr]

5. I would guess that this will not be the last time that this happens under that law. Hopefully it

will start people thinking that there is more than one reason this law is dangerous. If there is no intensive investigation in a death and the family of the slain man feels that there was no justice more of this will be happening. Not saying this gang slaying was vengence but it could have been.

[savalez]

8. +1

[Lasher]

9. The judge said Garcia could lawfully pursue a fleeing felon who had just stolen his property.

I agree he had a legal and moral right to do that.

[jwirr]

10. But that is exactly where the danger comes in. Taking the law into your own hands means that you

put yourself in danger. Police face this everyday. It is why we have them.

[Lasher]

14. What police?

If they had been there I'm sure Garcia would have been happy to have watched them chase down the thief and demand the return of his property.

[EC]

32. Don't think so.

The article indicates that the radios were stolen to begin with.(if I read it correctly) So that is likely why he didn't call the cops at all.

[Lasher]

34. Calling the cops would have been a futile exercise.

The thief was already running down the street with his radio. In my area the cops probably wouldn't have even responded.

My point is, the cops usually aren't there - and seldom can be in time to stop crimes in progress.

[EC]

35. Then I would have let him go

and called my insurance co. and gotten a better radio with claim settlement.

[Lasher]

37. That's cool, I might have done the same.

Even though I only have liability insurance on my car. Anyway I'm not the fastest gazelle in the herd.

[EFerrari]

15. In the moment, adrenaline can take over.

I chased a burglar out of my house and halfway up the block. And at one point, I thought, I have to slow down because I'm going to catch him. TG I didn't have a gun because I was not thinking clearly.

[Lasher]

47. You have chased me clear down an an entire DU thread and into another one.

I suspect a pattern of aggressive behavior.

[EFerrari]

52. LOL.

See? It IS a good thing I don't do guns.

[boppers]

74. WELL PLAYED!

[Hoyt]

13. I'm not sure about "moral right." Killing people over property is questionable.

[Lasher]

16. Did you read the story?

Once Garcia had caught up with the thief to demand the return of his property, the thief attacked him by swinging a bag of stolen radios at him.

[Hoyt]

21. So that justifies killing him with a knife, gun, or whatever.

I do agree that a knife is a little different from shooting someone in a case like this. But, killing someone for a bag of radios seems a bit much.

Still doesn't make it a moral right.

[Lasher]

26. You are conflating.

1. Garcia had a right to chase down the thief and demand the return of his property.

2. The thief first initiated deadly violence by swinging a bag of three stolen radios at him. Garcia reacted by defending himself with his knife.

[rhett o rick]

40. What is the definition of "chase down"? Does that include

fighting with the suspect?

[progressivebydesign]

56. someone swings a bag at you? you turn around and leave. you don't stab them to death. n/t

[Lasher]

58. Someone swings an argument like this at me.

I laugh.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

60. That is the intelligent choice, but it is correct that it is not legally required

I don't agree with the actions taken by the property owner during an after the incident, but it is reasonable to be allowed to defend yourself and not be forced to retreat automatically due to not being in your home.

[Lochloosa]

18. You have the "legal and "cough cough" Moral right to do that? Kill someone for PROPERTY?

Really? Was the Property in mortal danger also?

Fuck.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

20. I dig your signature!!!

[Lochloosa]

27. You welcome to steal it...i did. And I promise not to swing a bag of them at you.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

43. LOL!! Excellent! Thanks!! :)

[Lasher]

23. That's not what the judge said and it's not what I said.

Apparently the thief initiated the violence.

[Lochloosa]

25. I don't agree with you. As in the Martin case, the violence would not have been "initiated"

if had not chased him down. Remember, Zimmerman was told by the police not to follow Trevon.

Why is so hard for people to understand the "Stand your ground" law does/should not give you a right to pursue someone and just fucking kill them.

It's "STAND" your ground. In other words, if someone is breaking into your house, take them out. I have no problem with that.

Chasing or stalking someone then things turn violent and you kill them. That's Manslaughter at the very least.

[Lasher]

33. I don't have a hard time understanding SYG laws.

I just don't agree with you. Disagreeing with you is not synonymous with misunderstanding.

[PavePusher]

63. Let me see if I got this right......

1. If someone steals my property, I'm not alowed to chase them down and demand that they return it? That's fucked up.

2. If I make such a demand and they then attack me, I have no right to defend myself? That's fucked up as well.

Chasing someone to demand return of property is not an assault, or an initiation of violence.

I'll admit that keeping the stereos and not calling police afterwards sets off numerous alarm bells for me.....

[hack89]

31. No. You have a right to chase after a thief.

if that thief then attacks you, you can defend yourself.

[savalez]

61. Chasing someone is you attacking them.

[PavePusher]

64. Chasing someone who has stolen your property is not an attack.

It is a defense of your property.

If they then initiate violence when you catch up to them, you have a right to defend your person.

This is not a difficult series of concepts.

[hack89]

65. So SYG for the thief but not the robbery victim? OK

Last edited Fri Jun 29, 2012, 04:31 PM - Edit history (1)

Assault has a specific legal meaning. It does not include chasing after some one who has committed a crime and is trying to escape.

[savalez]

66. Sure, if you believe

the only participant who is still alive. It seems to me that SYG can be manipulated to absolve someone of murder, primarily if there are no witnesses and especially if you only get one side of the story. Perhaps not in this case but in general so I'll always be skeptical when that law is applied and wonder if the creation of it was ever really necessary - especially with the variable threshold of fearing for ones life (real or not). Were people really being regularly incarcerated for acting in self-defense?

[hack89]

67. The standards for self defense didn't change with SYG

the legal standard for fearing for one's life has been a part of self defense statutes for decades - all SYG did was extend the right to self defense to being in public. But the same standards are still being applied.

The purpose of SYG is simple - shift the burden of proof to where it belongs. We don't prove our innocence - the state has to prove our guilt. Would you rather have a few guilty go free to ensure no innocent are convicted or would you prefer innocent people are convicted to ensure no guilty go free?

[savalez]

71. I prefer neither.

[hack89]

73. That is not a reasonable choice

error is inherent in anything humans do. The question is in which direction you want the error to go.

[4th law of robotics]

11. Friends of the burglar?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

19. Yet another problem with this Stand Your Ground law is that people who get off will face

retaliatory violence, in my view. I believe that the same will happen to Zimmerman if he gets off. The NRA can't protect him forever. There's so much anger over this law and the injustice that comes with it, that people will just start killing Stand Your Ground perpetrators if they aren't brought to justice in the court system.

[Lasher]

22. This was not a revenge shooting.

According to the linked article Garcia apparently was the innocent victim of a gang shooting.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

41. Oh, thanks for the clarification.

[Great Caesars Ghost]

51. Innocent or set up?

When is comes to gang related hits, they are a lot smarter than you think.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

28. SYG continues to have broad support

Anger over it seems to be limited.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

42. SADLY!!

[secondvariety]

38. Is this the same clod

who sold the stolen radios? Sounds like he was as big a thief as the dude he killed.

[Scurrilous]

45. Yep.

<snip>

"Back on March 28, Garcia was granted immunity in Roteta's death despite the fact that Garcia, after discovering Roteta trying to steal his car stereo, chased Roteta down the street before stabbing him, didn't call police after the attack, and then hid the knife and pawned the other stolen radios he took off Roteta."

http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2012/06/man_cleared_in_controversial_s.php

[DiverDave]

39. Karma

of course, the judge is still breathing...

[valerief]

49. Chased him more than a block to kill him and was acquitted under the Shoot-Whoever-You-Want

law? How in God's name does that even make sense?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

55. Not even close to what happened, but lets not facts spoil your screed

[valerief]

57. Well, your disagreement contains no details to persuade me otherwise. nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

59. Read the thread...it is clearly there

Basically the property owner chased the thief down. When the thief attacked him, the property owner fought back and the thief was killed.

I do not agree with the actions taken by the property owner. Its not like his home dialysis unit was stolen, or things needed to feed the property owner's family. He also did not know if the thief had a gun. His actions afterwards were also wrong.

All that said, he did not "Chased him more than a block to kill him" as you screed was titled.

[Scurrilous]

50. Meanwhile...

Man who got 20 years for shooting at ground gets a new trial

<snip>

"A 65-year-old ailing Keystone Heights man who was sentenced to 20 years in prison for firing two shots into the ground has been granted a new trial after a judge ruled jury instructions were flawed in his trial two years ago.

The ruling by Fourth Circuit Judge Don Lester set Ronald Thompson free Wednesday night. He went to Jacksonville to live with his sister, Virginia Caldwell."

<snip>

"The incident that landed Thompson in prison happened on Sept. 19, 2009, in Keystone Heights.

According to court documents, Thompson was socializing with a friend on her porch when her grandson arrived with three friends. He had been barred from the house by his mother but tried to get in and began heatedly arguing with his grandmother.

Thompson, who had a concealed weapons permit, went to his truck, got his handgun and fired two shots into the ground, court documents state.

The teenagers left, and police came. Thompson, who had worked as a mechanic in Keystone Heights, was booked on four counts of aggravated assault for having fired the shots into the ground."

http://www.gainesville.com/article/20120627/ARTICLES/120629580/1139?Title=Man-who-got-20-years-for-shooting-at-ground-gets-a-new-trial-

Stand your ground.

Shoot your ground.

State of Florida =

[savalez]

62. Don't you get it? Warn go to jail; Kill go free.

coo-coo is right.

[longship]

53. Who lives by the sword will die by the sword

nt

[harun]

68. Good

[LisaL]

69. WTF a good about it?

He was going to work and apparently fell victim to random gang violence. So, again, WTF is good about that?

[harun]

70. It was raining justice, and he forgot his umbrella.

[LisaL]

72. Since when random gang violence is justice?

A 16 year old was also killed in that shooting.