The assailant is already setting up his stand your ground defense. Under Florida's law, which our legislature had the opportunity to revise and did not, a person may use deadly force in a situation where they fear for their own safety. Here is the exact language
"He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony"
Thus the "right" to use deadly force can be based on the belief that either death/great bodily harm might be imminent OR a forcible felony is about to happen
Here is the Florida definition of forcible felony:
“Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.
and lastly under Florida law a battery ..
The offense of battery occurs when a person:
1. Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; or
2. Intentionally causes bodily harm to another person.
A battery when the victim is aged 65 or older is a felony
784.08 Assault or battery on persons 65 years of age or older; reclassification of offenses In the case of battery, from a misdemeanor of the first degree to a felony of the third degree.
Thus if this shooter believed that he was preventing a battery on an elderly person (himself) his belief may be enough to get him off. Note that the definition does not require that the battery has taken place nor is taking place only that the shooter believes such an event is imminent. There is nothing in the law about who started the incident only about the state of mind of the person choosing to exercise his Florida right to stand your ground. If the shooter reasonably believed that he was about to be struck then one interpretation of this law is that he had a right to use deadly force to prevent the battery of a person aged 65+. A good lawyer can certainly make this argument and a judge can rule without the question going before a jury.
|