Florida Man Claims Self-Defense After Shooting Girlfriend, Seeks Immunity Under "Stand Your Ground" Law

A Florida man charged with shooting his girlfriend twice in the back has filed court documents claiming self-defense under the state's "stand your ground" law. Richard Raciak, 48, is facing second-degree murder charges for the April death of Allison Sheehan, 46.

Raciak's claim means prosecutors must show "clear and convincing" evidence that his use of force was unjustified. This is a higher legal standard than normally required but still lower than "beyond a reasonable doubt."

The "stand your ground" claim comes after Raciak tried and failed to have the judge removed from his case due to alleged bias. Judge Patricia L. Stowbridge previously denied Raciak's request for bond, stating that evidence for self-defense was "nonexistent."

Publicly available evidence seems to support the judge's opinion. Deputies responding to the scene found Sheehan with multiple gunshot wounds. Raciak, who claimed Sheehan attacked him with a wine opener, was located nearby and received treatment for dehydration.

Text messages from Raciak to his father paint a different picture. He wrote, "Allison was attacking me, I had to fire shots. Had to put her down. Self-defense. Only choice I had. Waiting on cops." He also sent a photo of Sheehan's body.

Raciak later told investigators that Sheehan attacked him during their son's birthday party, fueled by alcohol. He claimed she tried to "claw" his eyes out and pushed him to the ground. He then admitted to shooting her four times, initially aiming for her leg but admitting she was facing away when he shot.

Raciak's "stand your ground" claim will be tested in court, with a status hearing scheduled for March 28, 2024. The outcome could have significant implications for the controversial law and its interpretation in future cases.

This case highlights the complexities of self-defense laws and the burden of proof in such situations. It also raises questions about domestic violence and the potential for misuse of "stand your ground" claims.

[SOURCE]