Posted on 12/27/2018 10:31:47 AM PST by yesthatjallen
Typical LAZY, CONFUSED, STUPID media. Does not tell us what the bill allows. But does say they pulled the stand-your-ground feature, Kasick vetoed anyway, and they overrode veto. so we still do not have STAND-YOUR-GROUND. SMOKE AND MIRRORS!
Of course he did, because he is a democrat in an R jersey.
“self-defense” is usually seen as an affirmative defense. Defendants bear the burden of proving affirmative defenses.
“Innocent until proven guilty” refers to the prima facie case—the basic elements of the crime that the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt in order to justify a conviction. For example, the elements of the crime of robbery at common law are: (1) the taking of the property of another (2) from his or her person or in their presence (3) by violence, intimidation or threat (4) with the intent to deprive them of it permanently.
The prosecutor carries the burden to prove each of those elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
But affirmative defenses are basically saying “Yeah, even if all of those elements are met, there are additional facts that, if true, excuse my actions and make me not guilty of the crime.” In the robbery example, for instance, a criminal defendant could raise the affirmative defense of “Yes, I took the property of that guy, right from his hands, and I broke four of his fingers doing it, and I sure as heck was not going to ever give it back. The property was a gun that the guy was pointing at my wife and my actions were necessary to protect me and my family from threat of death or imminent bodily harm and were proportionate to the threat.”
Putting the burden on the prosecutor in this case is weird from a traditional criminal law perspective because it forces the prosecutor to prove a negative — that the accused did not act in self defense.
Notably, however, many states define manslaughter as the “unjustified” killing of another, without intent. By requiring the prosecutor to prove the killing was “unjustified” seems to place the burden on the prosecutor of proving a lack of self defense anyway.
Interesting. Thanks for the post. A man must know his limits; after reading that, I know now I would not have made a good lawyer.
bkmk
I hope this puts to bed any doubt kasich is nothing more than a left wing nut bag.
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Yep - I predict that Kasich will not be the 9th President to hail from Ohio...
I think Kasich's end run around the legislature to enact that Medicaid expansion pretty well put paid to that.
Exactly. Sounds like a fairly weak bill, yet he vetoed even that.
I recall, rightly or wrongly, Kasich being a prominent conservative advocate during the 1990’s. He has for some time been revealed as a complete phony. I have less regard for him now, than I do for the Khmer Democrats.
‘Kasich is being promoted by NBC/Comcast as the GOP Challenger to Trump in 2020.’
Kasich is being promoted by N one B ut C linton/Commiecast as the GOP Challenger to Trump in 2020.
Perhaps this ridiculous red-flag provision could be applied to suspected illegal voting. Temporarily strip the person of Voting Rights until their status can be confirmed. Let the courts weigh in on whether or not a constitutional right can be regulated without due process.
Affidavit: Suspects arrested in Laredo for allegedly supplying cartel with firearms, ammo
https://www.lmtonline.com/local/crime/article/Affidavit-Suspects-arrested-in-Laredo-for-13499733.php
“Kasich opposed language shifting the burden of proof in self-defense cases from defendants to prosecutors. “
Seems the government always has the burden of proof in criminal cases. Why would this even need to be a law?
KSucks is an extreme left-wing liberal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.