• @Rivalarrival
    link
    English
    024 days ago

    That’s not the important part. A jury can ignore all that. The law allows them to look at how she was victimized, and determine that her response was justified in light of the violence committed against her.

    The important part didn’t happen when she killed him in 2018. The important part happened in May, 2024. From wiki:

    On May 9, 2024, Kizer pled guilty to one felony count of second-degree reckless homicide, which carries a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison. On August 19, she was sentenced to 11 years in prison.[10]

    It’s pretty hard for a jury to acquit her when she enters a “guilty” plea.

    • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      023 days ago

      She pled guilty because she was denied a self defense argument. At which point they’re left with her admitting to shooting him with no legal reason.

      • @Rivalarrival
        link
        English
        1
        edit-2
        23 days ago

        No part of that comment is true.

        While a trial court did initially rule that way, that ruling was overturned on appeal, and she also won in the Wisconsin supreme court:

        The Wisconsin Court of Appeals overturned the trial court in June 2021, holding that the trial court had erred in its interpretation of the affirmative defense law, that the affirmative defense applied to any offense, including violent crimes, committed as a “direct result” of trafficking, and that Kizer could present evidence in support of the affirmative defense at trial

        In July 2022, the state supreme court upheld the appeals court’s decision overturning the trial court’s ruling that barred Kizer from raising the affirmative defense. In a 4-3 opinion, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the law provided trafficking victims with an affirmative defense to any offense, including violent crimes, committed as a direct result of the trafficking.

        Furthermore, her confession was thrown out:

        In October 2023, the trial court ruled that statements Kizer made during her interrogation by the police were not admissible because she did not receive a Miranda warning and her attorney was not present.[28]

        She won on every issue she raised, yet she still decided to enter a guilty plea.