stopping public information access to the cases where this law is successfully applied by the defense. the court records are to be expunged so no one can go back and take a closer look at the results. it was meant to "protect the privacy" of those who had charges cleared.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publics...o-court/217102
however, the more realistic reason this change was proposed was to hide the abuse of this law.
it turns out that SYG law has been used numerous times but outcomes of the application have been very uneven. journalists were able to obtain the information for 200 of such cases and compare the results here
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publics...ing-on/1233133
http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/
here's a few summary points of their findings
• People often go free under "stand your ground" in cases that seem to make a mockery of what lawmakers intended. One man killed two unarmed people and walked out of jail. Another shot a man as he lay on the ground. Others went free after shooting their victims in the back. In nearly a third of the cases the Times analyzed, defendants initiated the fight, shot an unarmed person or pursued their victim — and still went free.
• Similar cases can have opposite outcomes. Depending on who decided their cases, some drug dealers claiming self-defense have gone to prison while others have been set free. The same holds true for killers who left a fight, only to arm themselves and return. Shoot someone from your doorway? Fire on a fleeing burglar? Your case can swing on different interpretations of the law by prosecutors, judge or jury.
so you can see why this particular lawmaker(R) paid by gun manufacturers would want to keep the records burned so the general public could not examine the case and judge it for themselves with all the facts in the court records.
journalists are critical of this this proposed change.
"Closing records and putting controversial cases that involve violence into the dark is a bad idea, it is against democracy," said Neil Brown, Tampa Bay Times editor and vice president. "This would have inhibited our work further. Our work was done based on court records as well as the stories of the incidents when they occurred."
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publics...o-court/217102
however, the more realistic reason this change was proposed was to hide the abuse of this law.
it turns out that SYG law has been used numerous times but outcomes of the application have been very uneven. journalists were able to obtain the information for 200 of such cases and compare the results here
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publics...ing-on/1233133
http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/
here's a few summary points of their findings
Quote:
• People often go free under "stand your ground" in cases that seem to make a mockery of what lawmakers intended. One man killed two unarmed people and walked out of jail. Another shot a man as he lay on the ground. Others went free after shooting their victims in the back. In nearly a third of the cases the Times analyzed, defendants initiated the fight, shot an unarmed person or pursued their victim — and still went free.
• Similar cases can have opposite outcomes. Depending on who decided their cases, some drug dealers claiming self-defense have gone to prison while others have been set free. The same holds true for killers who left a fight, only to arm themselves and return. Shoot someone from your doorway? Fire on a fleeing burglar? Your case can swing on different interpretations of the law by prosecutors, judge or jury.
Spoiler
journalists are critical of this this proposed change.
"Closing records and putting controversial cases that involve violence into the dark is a bad idea, it is against democracy," said Neil Brown, Tampa Bay Times editor and vice president. "This would have inhibited our work further. Our work was done based on court records as well as the stories of the incidents when they occurred."