Alabama woman charged in her unborn baby’s death, cops say another woman pulled trigger

There is no account of her leaving the store, so I do not understand your point. From what I understand, pregnant lady attacked shooter lady, who had to defend herself.

 

She didn't fire the weapon. I understand how the law is written, I just don't agree with it.

 

It was not a charge, but rather the act. The individual in question made the conscious, deliberate decision to commit an unjustified act of assault against an innocent party. She then continued the assault to such an extent, that the use of deadly force against her was not only legally warranted, but legally justified.

Had the individual in question simply minded her own business and refrained from assaulting another, she would not have been shot, and the fetus would not have been lost.

Being pregnant is not an excuse to engage in criminal behavior.

 

She is not being charged for having an abortion. She is being charged for getting her future child murdered through her own criminal actions.

Who forced her to commit assault?

 

Perhaps read the article then we can talk.

 

What was the argument about?

 

the fetus was aborted against her will

you can't arrest women for having an abortion, especially one that is against her will

 

Someone being charged with a crime means absolutely nothing. Anyone can be charged for anything, even if they did not do anything wrong.

 

The question remains, what was the nature of the assault to justify using possibly lethal force against her? Was she, for instance, brandishing a knife to give the shooter cause to believe that her life was in imminent danger, so as to justify using a gun for self defense? Or was the gun holder just being an unmitigated piece of dung?

 

The woman in question was shot on the basis that she was engaged in violence at the time. She did not actually leave the store until after she was shot.

 

Actions have consequences. If one simply cannot conduct themselves in a socially acceptable manner, then that is their own fault.

 

Something related to the father of the fetus, who was not the husband of the woman who was pregnant.

 

Only because the mother chose to go out of her way to inflict an unjustified assault against an innocent party. Actions have consequences and the woman in question is learning that lesson the hard way.

Prove the individual who was assaulted deliberately intended to induce an abortion in the one who actually assaulted her.

 

Did she argue or did she physically attack the other woman?

 

You keep using that word "abortion", but I don't think you understand the definition.

Unless you are claiming the shooter deliberately attempted to kill the baby, it was not an abortion. The baby was not "aborted", it was terminated.

 

considering they were fighting over the same man, never know why she choose to fire into the belly of a pregnant women

a miscarriage is also an abortion

https://www.medicinenet.com/miscarriage_causes_and_symptoms/article.htm

"
Abortion: In medicine, an abortion is the premature exit of the products of conception (the fetus, fetal membranes, and placenta) from the uterus. It is the loss of a pregnancy and does not refer to why that pregnancy was lost.

A spontaneous abortion is the same as a miscarriage.
"

 

Apparently the Grand Jury does not agree with you, as they ruled her actions as self-defense.

 

According to the law of the state of Alabama, any use of unlawful physical force against a person is sufficient justification.

https://codes.findlaw.com/al/title-13a-criminal-code/al-code-sect-13a-3-23.html

Alabama Code Title 13A. Criminal Code § 13A-3-23

(a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he or she may use a degree of force which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose.  A person may use deadly physical force, and is legally presumed to be justified in using deadly physical force in self-defense or the defense of another person pursuant to subdivision (5), if the person reasonably believes that another person is:


(1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force.


(2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling.


(3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape, or forcible sodomy.


(4) Using or about to use physical force against an owner, employee, or other person authorized to be on business property when the business is closed to the public while committing or attempting to commit a crime involving death, serious physical injury, robbery, kidnapping, rape, sodomy, or a crime of a sexual nature involving a child under the age of 12.

(5) In the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or has unlawfully and forcefully entered, a dwelling, residence, business property, or occupied vehicle, or federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is in the process of sabotaging or attempting to sabotage a federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is attempting to remove, or has forcefully removed, a person against his or her will from any dwelling, residence, business property, or occupied vehicle when the person has a legal right to be there, and provided that the person using the deadly physical force knows or has reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act is occurring.

 

I have no problem with the assault charge.

 

OJ was found not guilty too, so not the first jury that might of got it wrong - and even in self defense you can choose where you aim the gun

 

Well, I have much more faith in a Grand Jury that reviewed the evidence than I do with someone on an internet forum trying to spin things to fit their anti-abortion narrative.

 

Irrelevant. The position being presented on the part of yourself is wrong. Accept it, get over it, and move on. Anything else is calling for the victim of an assault to be punished for defending themselves.

 

I never made the claim one way or the other, just what is possible and you do not know the truth, you may believe you do.... but it's only a guess too

 

I do not think the shooter should of been charged with manslaughter either, so I agree with the grand Jury that the shooter should not be charged if that is what they decided - thank you for agreeing with me

 

no manslaughter happened here, a forced abortion happened via the shooter's bullet which may of been shot in self defense