Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

How would the case have turned out, given VA law vs FL law?

Depends, Tommy. What part of Virginia? Had it happened in, say, South Hill, we'd have likely never heard about it. Up in Arlington, though, maybe the same, maybe worse.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I'm STILL baffled as to why we heard about it at all!

We're not a "Stand Your Ground" state but Z's case wasn't SYG. He was pinned to the ground getting his head smashed in.

In NoVA, the jury would have crucified GZ. Waynesboro, Staunton, Mt Pleasant or pretty much anywhere along the 81 corridor south of 66 and you would have never heard about it. There would have been no arrest, trial, second guessing or ACLU acting like the ACLU.

KaosDad wrote:I'm STILL baffled as to why we heard about it at all!

Left Wing MO... distract and attack. 35,000 shooting incidents a year. 16,000 are fatal, 10,000 are cold blooded murder and most of it is inner city black on black crime... So it made sense to blame the white community (aka the mixed race White Hispanic guy).

Plus I am 100% sure it was a distraction from the BS on the Obama front.

And that makes me ask another question. Why was GZ a White Hispanic but Obama is Black, not a White Black? Oh... wait... I forgot. If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have any standards at all. My bad.

Hard to say really, but I think there is a good argument to be made that the GZ shooting would have been "excusable homicide" versus "justifiable homicide" if the thing happened in VA.

I'm it's only the location that's important. It depends on the media, doesn't it? If you have a grieving family (understandably, if misguidedly) having a PR firm bringing it up nationally, bringing in Al Sharpton to get attention, and having a special section of Huffington Post to cheer it on, then the same pressure could be brought to bear.

As far as legal outcome if charges were pressed, I wouldn't want to guess.

NovaHunter: I've never heard the term "excusable homicide"?

Yep, Va has two forms of legal homicide; excusable and justifiable.

Excusable - able to be forgiven; forgivable.

Justifiable - able to be shown to be right or reasonable; defensible.

They both are pretty much the same thing. I don't know when one would be used over another. I would think in a self-defense case, either wold be applicable.

EDIT: Never mind. I found these two definitions.

Excusable homicide is the killing of a human being, when the party who is killing is not altogether free from blame, but the necessity which renders it excusable, may be said to be partly induce by his own act.

A justifiable homicide is a homicide that is commanded or authorized by law. The concept of justifiable homicide in criminal law stands on the dividing line between an excuse, justification and an exculpation. It differs from other forms of homicide in that, due to certain circumstances, the homicide is justified as preventing greater harm to innocents. A homicide can only be justified if there is sufficient evidence to suggest that it was reasonable to believe that the offending party posed an imminent threat to the life or wellbeing of another. To safely use a justifiable homicide law, one generally must objectively be able to prove to a trier of fact, beyond all reasonable doubt, the intent in the suspects' mind to commit violence. This blameless killing[1] is distinct from the less stringent criteria authorizing deadly force in stand your ground jurisdictions.

I have a little more faith in juries. I think it'd be justifiable homicide if he were prosecuted.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]