GUILTY FL - Jennifer Fulford, 56, Winter Park, 27 Sept 2017 *Arrest*

New Posts

  • #541
  • #542
Yikes, the court has not yet answered the question after nearly 30 minutes.
Prosecution lawyers look busy working on the answer.
I did some research and, of course (!), INTENT is complicated.o_O:confused:

Intent Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.
Intent Law and Legal Definition
Intent is a determination to perform a particular act or to act in a particular manner. Intent is usually based on a specific reason. It is an aim, design or a resolution to use a certain means to reach an end.

Intent is a mental attitude with which an individual acts, and therefore it cannot ordinarily be directly proved but must be inferred from surrounding facts and circumstances. Intent refers only to the state of mind with which the act is done or omitted.

The legal importance of what an individual intended depends on the particular area of law. In contract law, for example, the intention of the parties to a written contract is fixed by the language of the contract document. In the law of torts, intent plays a key role in determining the civil liability of persons who commit harm.

Specific and General Intent Crimes | LegalMatch
What are the Differences between Specific and General Intent Crimes?

Under the common law there are two general categories of crimes referred to as specific and general intent crimes. All crimes have two key parts known as the "actus reus" and the "mens rea". The actus reus refers to the requisite act of crime, and the "mens rea" refers to the requisite mental element of the crime.

The main difference between specific and general intent crimes comes down to the "actus reus" and "mens rea" components of each crime. Specific intent crimes require the individual to have a desire to commit the act, as well as, an intent to achieve a specific result.

Comparably, general intent crimes, you need only intend to commit an act which the law makes criminal. Meaning, you can be convicted of a general intent crime just by committing the crime.

What are Specific Intent Crimes?
Specific Intent refers to your state of mind at the time of the commission of the crime. Specific intent requires not only doing an unlawful act, but the doing of it with an additional subjective intent or objective.
The two levels of intent will be listed in the statute that defines the crime. Specific intent crimes are usually indicated by the use of such words as intentionally, knowingly, purposely, or willfully. Generally, if you did not act with the required intent, such as, if your actions had been part of a harmless prank, then you cannot be convicted of a specific crime.

For example, theft crimes are specific intent crimes because not only must the you intentionally commit an act of taking of another's property, but you must also act with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of their property.

Additional examples of specific intent crimes are:
  • Burglary;
  • Child Molestation;
  • Conspiracy;
  • False Pretenses;
  • Forgery;
  • Embezzlement;
  • Solicitation;
  • Theft (also called Larceny);
  • Robbery; and
  • Murder (most jurisdictions call this First Degree or Premeditated Murder).
What are General Intent Crimes?
A general intent crime only requires that you intend to perform the act. That is, you don't need any additional intention or purpose. For example, assault is usually a general intent crime. You only need to intend your actions, not any particular result. General intent crimes are easier to prove because it is not necessary to show that you had some particular purpose.

General intent refers to your state of mind at the time the crime was committed. A general intent crime requires only an intent to do an act that the law declares to be a crime even though the perpetrator may not know the act is unlawful.

For a general intent crime it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that you intend to cause a specific harm or end result. General intent crimes require no further mental state beyond a willingness to commit a crime. Usually a definition of a general intent crime describes only a specific act, and does not include a need for an intent to commit the crime.

A common example of a general intent crime is battery. It is a general intent crime because the prosecution only needs to prove that you “intentionally or recklessly touched a person in a harmful or offensive manner” to convict you of battery. Battery does not require an additional mental state, meaning, you don’t have to intend to hurt the person in order to be convicted.

Additional examples of general intent crimes include:
  • Assault;
  • Battery;
  • Rape;
  • Manslaughter (also referred to as Second Degree Murder);
  • Arson; and
  • DUIs.
For a DUI, you do not need to “intend” to drive drunk, instead you simply need to be drunk and drive. In many situations, those charged with a DUI did not consider themselves to be impaired enough to be guilty of a DUI. If it was also necessary for them to intend to openly break the law, then most people would not be guilty of a DUI.
 
  • #543
  • #544
Verdict
 
  • #545
  • #546
  • #547
  • #548
Monday, July 1st:
*Penalty Phase begins (Day 1) (@ 9am ET) - FL - Jennifer Lynn Fulford (56) (missing Sept. 27, 2017, Winter Park; found Sept. 30, 2017) - *Scott Edward Nelson (53) arrested & charged (10/1/17) & indicted (12/12/17) with 1st degree murder, kidnapping, burglary, assault & battery, (1st degree) car jacking with deadly weapon, (1st degree) robbery with firearm & (3rd degree) tampering with a witness. Plead not guilty. No bond on all counts. DP case.
Trial started 6/10/19 with Jury selection & ended on 6/21/19. Trial started 6/24 & ended on 6/27/19. 12 jurors & 3 alternates.
Jury selection from 6/10-21 & Trial info from 6/24/19 to 6/27/19 (Day 1-4) reference post #525 here:
GUILTY - FL - Jennifer Fulford, 56, Winter Park, 27 Sept 2017 *Arrest*
6/28/19 Day 5: Prosecutor Linda Drane-Burdick does closing argument. Defense Assistant Public Defender Robert Larr does their closing. Prosecutor Kelly Hicks gave the state's rebuttal closing argument. Judge is now reading jury instructions. Following a sidebar the judge told the jury Count 2 had been removed from their verdict form. There was no other explanation. On the indictment Count 2 is Burglary. On the first-degree murder charge the jury can consider the lesser charge of: 2nd-degree murder w/weapon, 2nd-degree murder, Manslaughter w/weapon & Manslaughter. Jury off to deliberate (about 12 noon ET to about 3pm). Judge excused three jury alternates for the day, but explained that they are still members of the jury & remain under the order of the court for possibility of second phase (penalty phase). Jurors are asking for transcript of Nelson's testimony, as well as letters he sent to state attorney, detective & all the rest of his letters. They can't get transcript but can have testimony read back. Also can't get letters because letters not admitted evidence. The jury ask another question: "Please define intent and when intent has to occur." Verdict after about 3 hours of deliberations: GUILTY of First-degree murder with a weapon. GUILTY on all other counts. Penalty phase begins Monday morning, 7/1. Nelson faces the possibility of the death penalty.
 
  • #549
 
  • #550
Watch Live: Scott Nelson Sentenced for Killing Nanny Jennifer Fulford After Burglary
Watch Live: Scott Nelson Sentenced for Killing Nanny Jennifer Fulford After Burglary
7:00 am, July 1st, 2019
Scott Nelson, 55, will be sentenced in a Florida courtroom in the first-degree murder of nanny Jennifer Fulford, 56. Jurors in Orange County found him guilty on Friday. Not a big surprise: He testified Thursday that he really did kill her.

The hearing is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. ET. Court is expected Monday, July 1 to Wednesday, July 3, followed by a break across the holiday weekend. It will likely finish up on Monday, July 8. Nelson faces either death or a life sentence. He was also convicted of kidnapping, carjacking, and robbery.
[...]
 
  • #551
  • #552
Wonder "what" that is about - re jurors....
 
  • #553
Niner said:
Wonder "what" that is about - re jurors....
Click to expand...

Hoping they have alternates so there is no mistrial. That would be awful
 
  • #554
  1. Monivette Cordeiro‏ @monivettec 42s43 seconds ago
    The accused juror says he actually said, "With everything I’ve heard, I don’t know if I can go after the death penalty." In opening statements, defense said Nelson had been abused and neglected as a child, had heavy drug, alcohol abuse and spent decades in solitary
  2. Monivette Cordeiro‏ @monivettec 2m2 minutes ago
    Here at the sentencing hearing for Scott Nelson, convicted of killing, kidnapping Jennifer Fulford. Nelson could get life in prison or the death penalty. A juror just reported another juror for allegedly saying he wouldn't vote for death unless Nelson killed 10 other people
 
  • #555
  • #556
  • #557
Gardenista said:
Hoping they have alternates so there is no mistrial. That would be awful
Click to expand...
3 alternates available. Court has spent more than 20 minutes thus far with this dilemma.
I think they should excuse the offending juror #218 (reported on court video as white male) and replace with an alternate.
 
  • #558
Judge just excused juror #218 for violation of court order.

Law & Crime Network‏Verified account @LawCrimeNetwork 29s29 seconds ago
#ScottNelson - BREAKING: Juror #218 excused for misconduct, violating the judge's order to not discuss the case.

Monivette Cordeiro‏ @monivettec 1m1 minute ago
Judge Keith White just excused the juror who said he might not be able to vote for death for violating the court's order not to discuss the case with fellow jurors. White told juror not to speak with other jurors or he would hold him in contempt. Juror apologized before leaving


 
  • #559
SeesSeas said:
Judge just excused juror #218 for violation of court order.

Law & Crime Network‏Verified account @LawCrimeNetwork 29s29 seconds ago
#ScottNelson - BREAKING: Juror #218 excused for misconduct, violating the judge's order to not discuss the case.

Monivette Cordeiro‏ @monivettec 1m1 minute ago
Judge Keith White just excused the juror who said he might not be able to vote for death for violating the court's order not to discuss the case with fellow jurors. White told juror not to speak with other jurors or he would hold him in contempt. Juror apologized before leaving
Click to expand...
Good decision on the Judge's part IMO
 
  • #560
Did a re-wind and watched it. I didn't hear the juror apologize
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

summer_breeze
FL FL - Stephanie Edwards, 51, Winter Park, 24 May 2010
Replies
11
Views
4K
luxISlight
luxISlight

Members online

... and 96 more.
Total: 2,805 (members: 97, guests: 2,708)

Online statistics

Members online
97
Guests online
2,708
Total visitors
2,805
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
632,918
Messages
18,633,539
Members
243,334
Latest member
Caring Kiwi
Back
Top