Mediaboss Marketing

TAMPA, Fla. - If signed by the Governor, Florida would become the first state to place the burden of proof in Stand Your Ground cases on the prosecution, instead of the defense.

Some fear this change will have a dangerous impact on domestic violence victims.

Mindy Murphy is C.E.O. of The Spring of Tampa Bay, a dedicated to preventing domestic violence and protecting victims.

"The reality is a domestic violence batterer or abuser has nothing to lose now by filing for a Stand Your Ground immunity claim," said Murphy.

Advocates warn the change in Florida's controversial Stand Your Ground self-defense law will have the unintended consequence of protecting abusers.

RELATED:Former Judge warns of dire consequences of Stand Your Ground changes

"It's going to be, potentially, a really great tool for an abuser to say 'hey, I was defending myself,'" said Murphy.

Murphy says that in many cases, victims are too frightened to come forward, taking a crucial piece of evidence away from the prosecution.

"Put her life at risk by testifying, then there's no way for the state to prove that it wasn't stand your ground."

Advocates want Gov. Rick Scott to help protect victims by vetoing the change.

"It happens behind closed doors and too often the only witness to the domestic violence is the perpetrator and the victim," said Murphy.

Lawmakers who support the change believe in strengthening the Stand Your Ground law is necessary because state prosecutors should always have to prove defendants acted outside the law, in any case.

View post:
Anti-domestic violence advocates warn against Stand Your Ground ... - ABC Action News

TAMPA, Fla. - How people accused of violent crime defend themselves in court could change drastically, after representatives voted to change Florida's self-defense law.

Now a former judge is warning of dire consequences, and an easier path for someone trying to get away with murder.

"This is what we call downstream consequences. The social policy set by this is really horrible," says Jeff Swartz, a professor at the Thomas M. Cooley Law School in Riverview.

Right now it's up to an accused defendant to prove they should be immune from a jury trial, but legislators, like Rep. Jeff Brandes of Pinellas County (R) are aiming to change what's known as the "burden of proof."

"The state should always have the burden of proof in these types of situations," Rep. Brandes told ABC Action News earlier this year, in support of changing the Stand Your Ground law. "The state should always have to prove that you acted outside the law."

But Swartz, who is a former County Judge in Florida, and serves as a legal expert for ABC Action News, is warning that the change means it will be up to the state to prove guilt to a judge before the trial ever even happens.

That could mean longer legal processes, and likely means a lot fewer cases will make it to trial.

"The idea that anybody charged with a violent felony -- assault, battery, attempted murder, murder -- can make the state prove him guilty, twice! As opposed to him having to prove he's entitled to the immunity and a jury decide if he's being truthful or not," is a bad idea, says Swartz.

And Swartz warns that in a system where witnesses are essential to get a jury trial, violent crime could become a lot more common.

"I think this will increase incidents of any kind of violence where they believe they can get away with it because there's nobody watching," explains Swartz.

The changes would take effect as soon as Governor Rick Scott signs it into law.

RELATED:Anti-domestic violence advocates warn against Stand Your Ground law change

Meanwhile, a lot could be decided by the first case to go through process under new law and that could be the local case of Curtis Reeves.

A judge has already rejected the former Tampa Police officer's request for immunity under Florida's Stand Your Ground law, but under the new law, he might be allowed to request another hearing on the matter, since the standards have changed.

"If I had to place a name on this I think this is the Curtis Reeves Bill," says Swartz to ABC Action News. "I think people saw what happened to Curtis Reeves. They sided with him. Some people were pushing for him. I think some of law enforcement was on his side, I think the NRA was on his side. And I think they wanted to create a circumstance in which someone like Curtis Reeves now gets a judge to maybe determine he doesn't have to stand trial in front of a jury where he believes he would most probably would be found guilty."

Read more:
Former Judge warns of dire consequences of Stand Your Ground ... - ABC Action News

TAMPA, Fla. - How people accused of violent crime defend themselves in court could change drastically, after representatives voted to change Florida's self-defense law.

Now a former judge is warning of dire consequences, and an easier path for someone trying to get away with murder.

"This is what we call downstream consequences. The social policy set by this is really horrible," says Jeff Swartz, a professor at the Thomas M. Cooley Law School in Riverview.

Right now it's up to an accused defendant to prove they should be immune from a jury trial, but legislators, like Rep. Jeff Brandes of Pinellas County (R) are aiming to change what's known as the "burden of proof."

"The state should always have the burden of proof in these types of situations," Rep. Brandes told ABC Action News earlier this year, in support of changing the Stand Your Ground law. "The state should always have to prove that you acted outside the law."

But Swartz, who is a former County Judge in Florida, and serves as a legal expert for ABC Action News, is warning that the change means it will be up to the state to prove guilt to a judge before the trial ever even happens.

That could mean longer legal processes, and likely means a lot fewer cases will make it to trial.

"The idea that anybody charged with a violent felony -- assault, battery, attempted murder, murder -- can make the state prove him guilty, twice! As opposed to him having to prove he's entitled to the immunity and a jury decide if he's being truthful or not," is a bad idea, says Swartz.

And Swartz warns that in a system where witnesses are essential to get a jury trial, violent crime could become a lot more common.

"I think this will increase incidents of any kind of violence where they believe they can get away with it because there's nobody watching," explains Swartz.

The changes would take effect as soon as Governor Rick Scott signs it into law.

RELATED:Anti-domestic violence advocates warn against Stand Your Ground law change

Meanwhile, a lot could be decided by the first case to go through process under new law and that could be the local case of Curtis Reeves.

A judge has already rejected the former Tampa Police officer's request for immunity under Florida's Stand Your Ground law, but under the new law, he might be allowed to request another hearing on the matter, since the standards have changed.

"If I had to place a name on this I think this is the Curtis Reeves Bill," says Swartz to ABC Action News. "I think people saw what happened to Curtis Reeves. They sided with him. Some people were pushing for him. I think some of law enforcement was on his side, I think the NRA was on his side. And I think they wanted to create a circumstance in which someone like Curtis Reeves now gets a judge to maybe determine he doesn't have to stand trial in front of a jury where he believes he would most probably would be found guilty."

View original post here:
Former Judge warns of dire consequences of Stand Your Ground changes - ABC Action News

The Senate blinked in afight over a standard of evidence, sending a fixto the states stand your ground law to Gov. Rick Scott.

The House on Friday voted to insist that the Senate accept its amendment to Sen. Rob Bradleys bill (SB 128), which aims to streamline claims of self-defense.

Last month, it OKd the bill but changedthe burden of proof to clear and convincing evidence, a lower threshold than the Senates beyond a reasonable doubt, to overcomeself-defense.

By Friday evening, the Senate finally accepted the change on a 22-14 vote.

Bill proponents want the burden tobe on the party seeking to overcome the immunity from criminal prosecution, usually prosecutors, requiring a separate mini-trial, of sorts.

In legal terms,clear and convincing evidence is a medium level of burden of proof, according to the Legal Information Institute atCornell Law School.

In order to meet the standard and prove something by clear and convincing evidence, a party must prove that it is substantially more likely than not that it is true, it says. This standard is employed in both civil and criminal trials.

The Republican majority in the Legislature wants to shift the burden to prosecutors, making them disprove a claim of self-defense. Astate Supreme Court decision had put the onus on the defendant to show self-defense.

Democrats have inveighed against the measure, saying it would encourage bad actors to injure, even kill, and then claim self-defense.

The stand your ground law, enacted in 2005, allows people who are attacked to counter deadly force with deadly force in self-defense without any requirement that they flee.

Originally posted here:
Legislative fix to 'Stand Your Ground' law goes to Rick Scott - Florida ... - Florida Politics (blog)

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - The Florida Senate stuck to its guns Thursday in a dispute with the House about a change to the state's stand your ground self-defense law.

Both chambers have broadly supported a bill (SB 128) that would shift a key burden of proof from defendants to prosecutors in stand your ground cases.

But with only a day left in the legislative session to reach agreement, the Senate on Thursday refused to go along with a change the House made to the bill. That could jeopardize the bill if the dispute does not get resolved Friday.

The dispute involves a House proposal to require prosecutors in pre-trial stand your ground hearings to overcome the asserted immunity sought by defendants through "clear and convincing evidence."

The Senate prefers a higher standard known as "beyond a reasonable doubt," and Senate sponsor Rob Bradley, R-Fleming Island, moved Thursday to reject the House position.

This is certainly an issue we debated very intensely during session and now it's time to make a decision, Bradley said.

Though lawmakers are expected to meet Monday to approve the state budget and budget-related bills, Friday is the final day they plan to consider other legislation. The session was scheduled to end Friday but had to be extended into next week to resolve the budget.

House leaders didn't immediately respond late Thursday about whether the House would accept the Senate position on the stand your ground bill.

But Rep. Jason Fischer, a Jacksonville Republican who is a co-sponsor of the House proposal, said, "I'm very optimistic that we will get it to the governor's desk."

The overall issue stems from a Florida Supreme Court ruling in 2015 that said defendants have the burden of proof to show they should be shielded from prosecution under the "stand your ground" law.

In "stand your ground" cases, pre-trial evidentiary hearings are held to determine whether defendants should be immune from prosecution. The bill would shift the burden from defendants to prosecutors in the pre-trial hearings.

Since the Supreme Court ruling, the National Rifle Association and other groups have lobbied for the shift.

The issue, however, has been controversial, with the Senate voting 23-15 in March to approve its version of the bill. The House approved its version last month in a 74-39 vote.

The stand your ground law says people can use deadly force and do not have a duty to retreat if they think it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm.

Critics of Bradley's bill argue, in part, that it would help put an end to cases before all the facts are revealed. Proponents say the measure better protects the rights of defendants.

News Service of Florida

Read the rest here:
'Stand your ground' dispute goes down to last day - WJXT Jacksonville