I just think that there is a huge lack of verifiable facts in this case. I think it always devolves into he-said, he-said and there is no way to tell exactly what happened from the facts that have been presented. I think posters on both sides are using facts very selectively and circularly. I don't think I've accepted anything said by the mugger at fact value simply because I don't think I've seen him say anything in the articles which I've read. Nothing. There are a few facts which seem not to be in dispute at all, from either side. I've tried as much as possible to base my conclusions and opinion on the facts which are not in dispute and not to fill in too much where there are no facts established in the public record.
I guess what was reported from the police that has some people worked up may have come from the jogger. Some posters have trouble believing that he was jogging with a gun and large amounts of money. I admit that is a little bit unusual-it may even mean he was up to no good but that remains just speculation. Of course none of that is illegal and I would need to see a lot more than speculation based on nothing to change my opinion. None of that justifies him being attacked. I haven't seen anything from any source that disputes that this was a planned mugging. I don't see any way around this--the mugger was acting with planning and premeditation. This is felonious assault under the laws of Florida. Felonious assault prohibits any claim for civil damages under Florida law. Period.
The fact is nobody has disputed that the mugger attacked first and that he planned it. That to me indicates that this was not a set-up--the mugger attacked first. At that point I believe the jogger has a right to defend himself. Was his belief that his life was in danger a reasonable belief? This is where there are some disputes about the facts based on if you believe to witness testimony or not. I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the jogger because I believe when you have been attacked at night that it is reasonable to believe that your life is in danger and to act accordingly.
On whether the jogger was reasonable in his use of force, etc. I've already said that my opinion could be changed with actual facts if they were in evidence. The fact that the mugger was shot in the hip and back is not enough for me to conclude that the jogger should have stopped. Florida law gives a good presumption that the jogger is allowed to stand his ground. We do not know how quickly the whole clip was emptied or how far away the combatants were from each other the entire time, etc. If he continued shooting while the mugger was 1/2 block away from him, I think that is very different than if he was still engaged in hand-to-hand combat. The fact is we simply don't know other than that the police concluded that the shooter was justified in his actions. Do you have any actual facts to add to the debate, or just more speculation on unknowns?
Hollow-point bullets are the ammunition that many, many people use when they are using a gun for self-defense. This has been pointed out time and again. The fact that the military doesn't use them and it strikes you as strange that they are still allowed for civilians doesn't really impact our case here. The fact is they are legal. The fact is that they are widely used for self-defense. His choice of ammunition is irrelevant.