Mediaboss Marketing

It's a frightening ordeal to imagine, but one Baxter Springs resident was recently the victim of an attempted home invasion in broad daylight.

BAXTER SPRINGS - It's a frightening ordeal to imagine, but one Baxter Springs resident was recently the victim of an attempted home invasion in broad daylight. The nightmarish situation forced the homeowner into what is being called a self-defense shooting. The home invasion occurred early Sunday afternoon at 234 East 6th Street, in Baxter Springs.

Baxter Springs Chief of Police Mike Kliewer said Chebonnie E. Saggert, 43, entered the residence armed with a knife. The home owners were present at the time, and Saggert is said to have assaulted and threatened them with the knife. After a struggle that disarmed the suspect's weapon, one of the residents fatally shot the suspect with a firearm. The Saggert was pronounced dead at the scene, and was identified by the Baxter Springs Police Department.

As there is no apparent connection between the suspect and the home owners, it remains unclear at this time why Saggert broke into the residence. The case is currently under investigation by the Baxter Springs Police Department. The police reported they've had previous dealings with Saggert, and it is possible he may have known the house was occupied by an elderly couple.

Until the investigation is closed and the police have issued an official report, it's merely speculation, but early evidence suggests the situation is likely to fall under Kansas's "stand-your-ground" law. Kansas is one of several states to have a "castle doctrine", or a law which grants legal protection to an individual who uses a gun for self defense in their home. The term 'castle doctrine' is derived from the dictum that "an Englishman's home is his castle". This concept was established as English law by the 17th century jurist Sir Edward Coke, in his The Institutes of the Laws of England, 1628, and subsequently came to the New World with the colonists.

These days most states have stand-your-ground laws where individuals can use deadly force in circumstances of self-defense. In Kansas the specific laws are Kansas' Self-Defense & Defense of Others Statutes (KSA 2011 21-5220 through 21-5231), and first went into effect in 2006. The laws cleared up a misconception about whether or not individuals had to attempt to retreat. Now, if you're defending yourself, you do not have to retreat, hence the colloquialism, stand-your-ground.

Critics of these types of laws have argued that this allows citizens to use excessive force, and paint a picture of a lawless, wild west. The issue was catapulted into public discussion in 2012 when George Zimmerman, 28, a neighborhood watch volunteer in Sanford, Florida, fatally shot Trayvon Martin, 17.

The stand-your-ground law apparently has not been applied much in Kansas, and no specific numbers are available statewide. A spike in justifiable homicides by citizens could be an indicator that stand-your-ground laws were creating a problem, although justifiable homicides wouldnt necessarily be directly correlated to a stand-your-ground incident. Nationally, the recent rate of justifiable homicides by citizens has been fairly steady, according to the FBI, climbing about four to five percent annually the last decade.

Read more:
Homeowner forced into harrowing decision - Miami News Record

This weeks Glamorous Grad Student, Sharese King, is a fifth-year Ph.D. candidate in linguistics. King is interested in social linguistics, especially at the intersection of anthropology, psychology and linguistics. Last year, along with her mentor Professor John Rickford, King co-authored an award-winning paper in the scientific journal Language on criminal justice biases towards speakers of African American Vernacular English (AAVE) and other dialects. The Stanford Daily spoke with King about her three-year research experience and inspiration for the paper.

The Stanford Daily (TSD): Why are you pursuing linguistics as field of study?

(CHENYE ZHU/The Stanford Daily)

Sharese King (SK): For me, at least, growing up I always had a fascination with writing as well as with science, and doing linguistics combines both my enthusiasm and my passion for the English language with the methods used in science, investigative tools and things like that. So, I felt like it combined both of my interests.

TSD: What did you study for your award-winning article?

SK: The article is actually about the speech of Rachel Jeantel, who was the key witness in the trial for George Zimmerman, the man who murdered Trayvon Martin. The article is really about exploring how speakers of a stigmatized dialect are perceived on multiple levels in a courtroom. [What] were trying to do is use Jeantel as a lens to say, look, yes this person was discredited for the way she spoke both [by] people online as [by] people on the jury there were comments made about her speech not being credible. So were using her as a lens to say how often does this happen in courtrooms across America, how often are people who dont speak this imagined, standard English penalized in some sort of way for not knowing that particular dialect.

TSD: What inspired you to pursue this topic?

SK: Its a co-written paper. The co-author is my mentor and professor, John Rickford. He was inspired to do the work, was writing blog posts about it, and sent out an email to the department saying, Hey, if anybody else is interested in working on this, Id be interested in working with you outside of class. And so, I sent an email expressing my interest because I saw the response Jeantel got publicly when she was giving her testimony. The project is about three years in the making. Weve been working on it fora long time ,and I actually have a separate research agenda on top of this paper [apart] from this, so its definitely a labor of love, but one we felt was very important.

TSD: What kind of research did you conduct?

SK: In linguistics, we really care about peoples speech, so great sound recordings are what we aim to collect whenever we want to do some analyses. There are other things linguists can use such as written text, but for the kinds of things we were interested in, recordings were best. We took Jeantels recordings from the trial, her testimony, which was about six hours long. We took the interview data from shows like Piers Morgan, when that was still a thing, as well as background deposition data, things that werent immediately available for the public, but that we were able to get ahold of.

TSD: Did you intend to publish? How did that intention affect your research?

SK: We aimed to have publication come from this work. Originally, we had another destination in mind. Professor Rickford gave the presidential address for the Linguistic Society of America on this subject and from that we were able to turn it into a publication for Language, which is our top-tier journal, like a Nature.It really is a call to linguists to say, knowing the potential consequences and ramifications for speakers of stigmatized dialects, we have to make sure that we step in in whatever ways we can. There is a list of suggestions at the end of the article. Its a call to linguists to ask: How can we step up, how can we do more than sit in our offices and write papers for each other, how can we have a greater impact on society? And, despite the fact that our audience is mainly linguists, many people who are not linguists have found it to be useful and rewarding.

TSD: How did it feel to win and to accept the award?

SK: I am very young in my career, so getting a paper in Language is something that I would normally expect from someone later on in their career, someone who has made more discoveries. Not to say that younger professors get it, but usually professors get it. So, for me, it did feel very surprising that we got it, but it sets a precedent that some of this more social-political work can be publishable in these places.

It was definitely a surprise, but a welcome one. I am happy that people responded to it well and like the work we are doing. I hope that it continues, that we see linguists being more involved in some of the social-political issues happening in our time.

Ive written papers for peer-reviewed proceedings, but never in a peer-reviewed journal of this caliber. This paper is more political in my work. I have some work thats more psychological and anthropological, interested in how people use linguistic variables to construct their identities. I talk this way because Im like this, because Im from here and how people conceive of themselves of speakers of their language.

Originally, I hadnt planned to go to the conference this year because I didnt have any new research to present. So, when I found out about the award, my father was so excited that he bought me a ticket to go to the conference. At the last minute, I went down and was able to enjoy that. It was an honor to receive this award with my co-author who had mentored me in a number of ways and we worked really hard on this.

TSD: Where do you see the future of interdisciplinary linguistics heading other than analysis and translation?

SK: I see a lot of corporations hopping on this wave of getting to know certain dialectical patterns in order to sell a product or market to a certain kind of people. Theres a paper out of the University of Massachusetts about learning how to figure out which of their speakers who use Af-Am English are African-Americans based off of patterns in their speech and writing programs for that. This kind of advanced-level marketing is where people are trying to move, trying to get better at understanding each other.

TSD: Whats in store for you next?

SK: Im currently in the dissertation phase of my Ph.D. process, so my plan is to hopefully graduate in 2018 and go on to be a professor.

Contact Josh Wagner at jwagner4 at stanford.edu.

Read more from the original source:
Q&A with Sharese King on biases against African-American vernacular in criminal justice - The Stanford Daily

Sen. Carrie Ruud, R-Breezy Point, introduced Senate File 292 in the Senate, but the original is a House of Representatives bill authored by Rep. Jim Nash, R-Waconia, House File 238.

Rep. Josh Heintzeman, R-Nisswa, is one of the sponsors of the House version.

Although the formal title is the Defense of Dwelling and Person Act, both Ruud and Heintzeman described it as a Stand Your Ground bill.

Stand Your Ground laws eliminate the legal expectation that people should try to get away when confronted with aggression outside the home, rather than use force. This expectation is called the common-law duty to retreat and is used to determine whether people truly were justified in using deadly force or not.

Stand Your Ground laws drew nationwide attention when Floridas version of the law played a role in the case of George Zimmerman after he shot black teenager Trayvon Martin in 2012.

The existing law in Minnesota, which gives the right to use lethal force to prevent great bodily harm or death, or within ones home in order to prevent a felony, is expanded to authorize lethal force under an additional circumstance.

Under the new proposed law, people would also be authorized to kill in order to stop what they reasonably believe is a forcible felony in most locations, even outside their home. The bill defines forcible felony as a crime punishable by a jail sentence of more than one year, and which includes the use or threat of force. It lists examples of offenses that fit under the criteria, ranging from first degree murder to crimes like arson and third degree assault.

The bill also lowers the threshold for killing to prevent great bodily harm or death to simply substantial bodily harm. Under the definition of the term in a separate, existing Minnesota law, substantial bodily harm is bodily injury which involves a temporary but substantial disfigurement, or which causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or which causes a fracture of any bodily member.

Heintzeman posed the hypothetical scenario of what someone is supposed to do if attacked outside their home.

I think people are worried that if theyre in a parking ramp and somebody approaches them with a knife or a weapon or a bottle or something, even a gun, are they within their right to defend themselves? he said. You tell me . because Castle Doctrine can be interpreted at times (to say) no, you have an obligation to get away rather than defend yourself in that situation.

Heintzeman asked rhetorically where someone could flee to in a parking ramp.

Do you risk going to jail and defend your family, or do you defend yourself in another way? he said.

Crow Wing County Attorney Don Ryan brought up the same scenario of being attacked in a parking ramp to explain why he thought the bill was a bad idea. In Minnesota, people already have the right to use deadly force in self-defense outside the home if deadly force is being meted against them by their assailant -- but they have a legal duty to try and get away first if they can.

Lets say (youre) standing in a parking garage and theres someone 100 yards away, and they pull a knife and put it over their head, Ryan supposed. Theyre saying Im going to kill you and they come running at you. Youre right next your car where you can quickly open it up, close it, lock the car and start driving away. That would be a reasonable duty to escape, right? Under this bill, you could just pull out your gun and shoot them, because theres no duty to retreat anymore.

The Minnesota County Attorneys Association opposed a Stand Your Ground bill when it was introduced earlier in the decade and opposes it now, as its come up in 2017, Ryan said.

From my perspective, I dont see why this bill would enhance public safety, he said.

The bill removes objective standards surrounding self defense and forces law enforcement authorities to prove what people who used deadly force were thinking when they pulled the trigger, Ryan said. It also creates a presumption that people are automatically immune from prosecution if they act in self defense, he said.

Now weve just got people running around with guns, and if they feel threatened, they get to shoot people, he said.

Ruud said she doesnt expect the bill to pass this session, rather, she wants Minnesotans to know gun rights are still a priority to lawmakers. She also wants the initiative to get committee hearings so the new crop of freshman legislators know whats in it.

Although Ruud couldnt think of any specific instances of constituents telling her they werent safe because of existing self defense law, she added that shes heard from those who wish for the elimination of the duty to retreat, inside their home or out.

Asked about the dissent against similar Stand Your Ground Laws, Ruud pointed out that the 2003 law that allowed Minnesotans to carry handguns in public was also met with fears of diminished public safety, which turned out to be overblown.

Im aware of the controversy, but I also know that when we passed the (Citizens) Personal Protection Act, everybody said it was going to be the Wild, Wild, West, she said. In all these years since it passed, we have seen the exact opposite. There hasnt been anyone who has a permit thats really been convicted or used that gun in a crime. So, we think that putting forward good laws, and having people understand what its all about, is the best way to go.

See the original post:
Northern Minnesota legislators introduce 'Stand Your Ground' bill - Bemidji Pioneer

Nearly five years after his death, Trayvon Martins parents say theyre considering running for political office in hopes of being part of the change the countryneeds, according to a USAToday report.

Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin spoke with USAToday ahead of the release of their book, Rest in Power: The Enduring Life of Trayvon Martin, which publishes Tuesday. The book gives a behind-the-scenes look at the teenslife, what his family went through after his death and their role in a nationwide movement to stop racial injustice.

Trayvon Martin was shot to death Feb. 26, 2012 in a Sanford neighborhood by former Neighborhood Watch volunteer George Zimmerman.Zimmerman was acquitted in 2013 of killing the unarmed black 17-year-old.

His death helped spark the Black Lives Matter movement and fueled a nationwide conversation on minority rights.

In the USA Today interview, Trayvon Martins parents said they never wouldve considered running for office before their sons death. Now, its something they feel obligated to do, to be part of the change, said Fulton, Trayvon Martins mother.

Fulton campaigned last year for presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and told USAToday she fears President Donald Trump will reverse whatever change has happened since her sons death, according to the report.

Their political runs could start small, with a look at local offices, but both told USAToday they wontlimit their goals.

Read the full USAToday report here.

The rest is here:
Report: Trayvon Martin's parents considering political runs - Orlando Sentinel

The Associated Press

JACKSONVILLE A Florida woman whose conviction sparked a change in the state's gun laws is now completely free and says she plans to run an organization to help victims of domestic violence caught up in the criminal justice system.

Marissa Alexander told The Florida Times-Union that she wants to help others because "from what I've been through I know a lot more about the system and how it fits together."

"I've been contained since 2011," Alexander said. "But I'm excited to have the chance to give back using whatever platform I have."

Alexander attracted national attention after she was sentenced in 2012 to 20 years in prison for firing a shot near her estranged husband during an altercation. She argued she had fired a "warning shot" and unsuccessfully tried to use Florida's "stand your ground" law as part of her defense.

Her husband denied abusing her and said she shot at him in anger after he insulted her former husband. Prosecutors insisted it wasn't a warning shot because it hit the wall behind Gray and not the ceiling.

Alexander's case became noticed because it was contrasted against what happened to George Zimmerman who was acquitted in the 2012 shooting death of Trayvon Martin after he said he shot an unarmed Martin in self-defense.

Alexander's conviction was thrown out on appeal and she reached a plea deal in 2014. Her case was cited by legislators when they altered Florida's mandatory sentencing law nearly three years ago.

Alexander was released from home detention last week. She has begun the process of setting up the Marissa Alexander Justice Project which will not only focus on female victims of domestic violence but will be critical of minimum-mandatory sentences like the 20 years Alexander once faced after she was initially convicted.

She told the newspaper that her fame is still something she struggles with, rolling her eyes when a reporter told her she's famous but also acknowledging the oddity that many people who've never met her are familiar with her case.

"The surreal moment for me was getting mail from Great Britain and Australia," Alexander said.

Continue reading here:
Woman in "warning shot" case free to help others - The Ledger