George Zimmerman judge denies 'stand your ground' in unrelated case
By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel
5:54 p.m. EST, December 19, 2012

SANFORD – The judge in the George Zimmerman murder case Wednesday rejected the "stand your ground" claim of a Casselberry man in an unrelated case who was arrested for whacking his neighbor in the head with a shovel.

James Fraleigh, 54, testified last week that he was legally standing his ground when he hit Dylan Wells, 21, during a disagreement Jan. 7 about a fence that separated their homes. Wells suffered a gash to the back of his neck but was not seriously hurt.

Fraleigh said he swung the shovel after Wells had charged him, head down, and struck him below his waist. He was afraid, Fraleigh testified, that he was about to suffer a serious injury.

But in a written order signed Wednesday, Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson described Fraleigh as the aggressor. He was not defending himself, she wrote, and thus was not entitled to immunity.

Her order made clear that she did not believe Fraleigh's account.

The wound on the back of Wells' neck, she wrote, indicating that Fraleigh whacked the victim as he was walking away — not while the two were in contact.

She made that conclusion, she wrote, because the shovel handle was about 5-feet long, too long for the close contact blow that the defendant described.
....SNIP......
She's now heard two and rejected two "stand your ground" claims. The first was earlier this year when she ruled against a homeless man, Kishawn Jones, who fatally shot another man in a dispute over a cheap gun and $20. A jury later acquitted him.

...more at link
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/loc ... 1733.story

DebFrmHell
Hero Member

IMO only. I don't think the judge is going to rule in favor of self-defense in this case. She has had two SYG hearings and kicked both to a jury. The first one, I thought there was evidence to support self-defense and the jury acquitted the person on trial. The last one I agreed with. That one needs a jury.

I firmly believe that Zimmerman should not take the stand in an immunity hearing. I think that MOM can proceed with his case since he has witnesses and injuries that support GZ's narrative. The bar is lower and I believe that the preponderance of evidence is in favor of Zimmerman.

The thing I like best about the immunity hearing is that it will lock down evidence that the prosecution intends to use against GZ in the event of a trial. It can be used to impeach testimony in the event of a trial, if necessary. (Remember I believe that there will be a trial. Judges are elected officals. Unless Debra Nelson wants to be "unelected" she will kick the can.)

The same could be said for Zimmerman. I believe he has a firm self-defense case but no coaching in the world is going to get him around the hidden money in the fund. He can explain his distrust, and with all of the events that transpired in the initial days/weeks following the shooting- I don't blame him, but it is still going to show him as dishonest which throws a shadow on his testimony.

He doesn't come across as a sympathetic figure. He had to have been prepped extensively for that Hannity interview and, IMO, that was not successful. That was a softball interview. Getting crossed by the Prosecution is a whole 'nuther ballgame. They will use anything they can against him.

Thanks Deb

I responded to the "Robert" post at CTH. I never wanted nor checked the email supplied... and certainly did not realise there was CRIMINAL activity with people impersonating him on Twitter etc.
I hope the people doing this are subject to criminal charges... and perhaps Civil law suits later.

I can think of SEVERAL prime suspects who are known to us all as twitter nuts (some with criminal records already)

I have commented before that even with all her failings (many) I am surprised that Natalie Jackson associates and links herself to these people. I would still expect a lawyer (even her) to behave in a more professional manner.... or at the very least not be so public with whatever dubious activity she engages in?

Exactly! You are right to SPELL THIS OUT!!!

Trayvon never struck George, it is simple, it did not happen! George is lying from the very beginning of his story until the very end, imo.

George was all crunked up on meds/drugs/liquor or some other $hit and there is no telling when or how he got his little cuts and scraps but they DID NOT come from Trayvon Martin's hands.

I can't wait for Bernie to prove it in the courtroom!!!