Would the verdict have been the same if she'd been white?

By MAMAMIA TEAM

In May 2012, Marissa Alexander was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Her crime? Not murder, or manslaughter. Not armed robbery or causing physical harm of any kind.

Alexander will spend two decades behind bars because she fired a warning shot into the ceiling during a fight with her estranged husband.

On the day the crime took place, Alexander was visiting the home she used to share with her husband Rico Gray. Alexander thought he wouldn’t be there and was planning to pick up some of her clothes. An altercation took place where Gray grabbed her by the neck and threatened her.

Before learning what happened next it’s important to note that this wasn’t the first time Gray has attacked Alexander. Two years earlier in 2012, Gray had attacked his wife when he discovered text messages from her ex-husband on her mobile phone.

At the time of the 2012 attack, Alexander and Gray were formally estranged. She had even taken out a restraining order against him, indicating she was fearful of what he might do.

What happened after Gray grabbed Alexander by the neck is a matter of dispute.

Alexander says she then ran to the garage and grabbed a gun, before firing a warning shot into the ceiling. Opposing counsel argued that she was firing the gun in the direction of Gray and his two sons. They claim that even if she wasn’t aiming for her estranged husband and his family, the bullet could have easily ricocheted and hit somebody.

She could have done serious damage, they argued, in support of a lengthy prison term for Alexander.

And yet: No one was actually shot. No one was harmed. And according to Alexander, no one could have been.

Thirty-two-year-old Alexander’s lawyers argued that she was firing the shot in self-defence, as her husband had physically assaulted and threatened to kill her.

Alexander tried to use a particular defence that is available in Florida titled ‘Stand Your Ground’, which generally removes a person’s duty to retreat if they are confronted which possible danger and instead allows them to use deadly force if they think their lives are at risk.

During her trial, Florida officials argued that the law was applicable to her case.

State senator Gary Siplin said, “The stand-your-ground law was legislated and implemented to protect people like Ms Alexander…”

“She did not have a history of criminal or violent behaviour; instead, she had a history of being physically and emotionally abused.”

Despite this, the jury took just 12 minutes to convict Alexander. The judge sentenced her to 20 years in prison (the mandated minimum sentence for her charge – aggravated assault).

The case draws many issues into the spotlight. In particular, the harsh nature of mandatory minimums and also whether race played a role in the jury’s decision to convict Alexander in the first place.

Alexander’s congresswoman came out and told the media that she believed black people are more often are incarcerated for longer periods of time because of ‘overzealous prosecutors and judges bound by mandatory minimum sentences.

Alexander was going to spend the best years of her life in jail – but now, an appeal has been granted.

The appeal court judge, James H Daniel, has said he is giving Alexander a new trial because “the jury instructions on self-defence were erroneous.”

That is, the jury did not have the burden of proof necessary in the case explained to them properly.

Whether or not the courts decide for a second time that Marissa Alexander is a criminal, remains to be seen. But there is one thing she certainly is: a survivor of domestic abuse and a woman who was left in a desperate situation.

Guns are dangerous weapons – America’s frequent gun-related deaths are a testament to that fact. And shooting a gun at another person is a serious crime, and not to be taken lightly.

But domestic violence is a serious crime as well and one that leaves more than physical scars. Surely the real threat of violence from her husband should be relevant to whether or not Alexander’s actions were understandable.

Do you think Alexander deserved 20 years in prison for her crime? Do you think that race played a role in the jury’s decision?