Thursday, October 09, 2014

Florida Father's Mistakes; 20 Years for Warning Shot



Florida passed a reform of its gun law this year to prevent situations such as what has happened to Lee Wollard.   Wollard says that he fired a shot to stop an assault and force a young man out of his house;  the prosecutor charged him with firing into a building, aggravated assault and child endangerment.   The young man was dating his daughter and was 17.

No one was hurt, but the bullet penetrated the walls of the house and struck the house next door.

Under the old Florida law, the prosecutor could offer this dilemma: plead guilty, be convicted of a felony and lose your civil rights, but spend no time in jail, only probation; or take a chance with the jury system, which will not be informed that you will be sentenced to a mandatory 20 years, and will not be informed that they have the right to find you not guilty if they believe the application of the law is unjust.

In my opinion, this gave the prosecutor entirely too much power.   Essentially the  system was put in place where one man can say: if you dare to exercise your right to a jury trial, you have to accept significant risk of going to jail for 20 years.   Plead guilty, even if you think you are innocent, and I will keep you out of jail.

Florida thought that was too much power for one man to have, so they reformed the law.   The next Lee Wollard will not have to face that dilemma.

Lee Wollard made a series of simple errors that brought him to this situation.  These mistakes would not have been made if Wollard were a lawyer,  But most people who are not involved with the criminal justice system could easily make them, because they do not know how the system actually works.

First mistake:  Not knowing the legal consequences of trying to help a 17 year old homeless young man.

Lee Wollard tried to help a homeless 17 year old boy that his 16 year old daughter was dating.   He invited the young man into his home.   About a week later, things started to go bad.     He put his family at risk two ways.   By inviting the person into his house, he lost control of the situation.   The law often gives special rights to "domestic partners" in housing.   The young man was dating his daughter.   Second, the young man was under 18, thus legally a "child".  Children are a special class under the law, with  special protections.  From cbsnews.com:
Lee Wollard's troubles began six years ago. He was a professional with a master's degree in Davenport, Fla., living with his wife and their two daughters and working at Sea World. When his youngest daughter Sarah began dating a troubled 17-year-old teenager with no place to live, Wollard and his wife, Sandy, took him in.

Second mistake:  Not knowing how to use the legal system to evict the young man.

Lee Wollard tried to get the young man to leave when the situation started getting bad.   The young man and his daughter would disappear for days.   The young man refused to leave.   Police were called, but were of no help.  This is where Lee Wollard made the second mistake.   He could have hired an attorney, went to court, and obtained a restraining order against the young man.  He did not, and I suspect that no one advised him of the possibility.
 "We had tried calling the cops," said Lee Wollard. "We had tried doing everything. Nothing worked. Nothing."
Third mistake:  Not knowing how to use the legal system to protect yourself in a situation where force had been used.

The daughter and  young man got  into a loud fight.   Someone cried for help.  Wollard grabbed his revolver and moved toward the problem.   He says the young man lunged at him.   The former boyfriend denies it.   He fired a shot that did not  hit anyone, just a wall.   The young man left.   He thought his  problems was solved.   Then he made a crucial mistake.   He did not call the police.

According to Wollard, the young man lunged at him and punched a hole in a wall; the young man disputes that. But no one disagrees about what happened next.
"So I fire a warning shot into the wall, [and] I said, 'The next one's between your eyes,'" said Lee.

Sandy continued, "And the kid turned around and just hurried out the door. And that was the end of that."
The bullet had penetrated the walls  of his house and hit a neighbor's house.  The police and prosecutor heard the version of events put forward by the "endangered child" before they heard those  of the homeowner, who had not called the police.   In that version  the shot was not a "warning", but simply missed.  Thus Wollard was immediately cast into the role of the perpetrator, instead of the defender.

Fourth Mistake:  Believing that a jury would make an informed decision.

The prosecutor charged Lee Wollard with shooting into a building with a firearm, aggravated assault and child endangerment. Because of the special circumstances involved, they offered a plea bargain: plead guilty to a minor felony, lose your constitutional rights, accept being under close supervision for years - or - we will prosecute you for shooting into a building with a firearm, aggravated assault and child endangerment, with a 20 year mandatory sentence because you used a gun.

Wollard never believed that a jury would convict him.  He probably did not know that the jury would not be allowed to know what the sentence would be, and was not allowed to be told that they had the power to ignore the judges instructions if they believed an injustice was being done.

He refused to plea bargain, and lost the jury trial.
 "Never, never in my wildest dreams did I think I would be here," he said in prison. "I still have a hard time believing it. It's unbelievable!"
The Florida legislature reformed the law so that this will not happen to another.   But the reform came too late for Lee Wollard.  Lee Wollard's mistakes really come down to errors of ignorance and trust in the justice system.    He believed that common sense and justice would prevail.  Most people do.  It usually does, but simple faith in the system can lead you to errors that will trap you and end with a bad result.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

3 comments:

Charles Lara said...

The decision to sentence Lee Wollard to twenty years in prison, for firing a warning shot, to protect his daughter, from physical harm, by her troubled boyfriend, is egregious! Would the State's Attorney reacted the same way, if his child was being physically attacked, by a juvenile thug, inside his own home? This is not only egregious, but extremely stupid, because rational and logical thinking remained on the dock, while the stupid ship left. Let me see, I've spent several vacations in Florida, but I will not spend my money or patronize your State, until Lee Wollard is released from prison, and is exonerated for doing the right thing, and protecting his family. You have the right to protect yourself from both imminent bodily harm, or if you are facing possible death, by an attacker. Stupidity apparently ran rampant, and especially when the Judge sentenced this Senior citizen to a lengthy prison term, and detached him from his loving family. I'm biting my tongue not to curse here, and can't believe how dumb this decision was, and that there must be a bunch of spineless people, that did not stand up, and side with Lee Wollard, and do the right thing, but instead, boarded the stupid ship, and left for Stupid Island. How cruel, and Shame on you!
By: Charles Lara Date: 10/9/2014

Texas TopCat said...

A warning shot is almost always a legal problem. If you are justified to use deadly force then use deadly force. However, if you shoot a warning shot you are admitting that you used deadly force without justification.
If you use a gun, then you had better call the police and get your side on the record as the victim.

Anonymous said...

The bullet his a neighbor's house. That means there was a Rule 4 violation. It didn't make your list of his mistakes? Why not?