# Did Trayvon Martin have the right to stand his own ground? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 18, 2012, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287 "2012-05-18T03:13:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 30
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/581 "2012-06-11T03:50:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But in this case, we have a special prosecutor. She won’t lose her job if she fails to get a conviction. She has a reputation of being very vigorous, very aggressive, but I’ve never heard it said of her that she is underhanded or unethical. > > So despite the fact that there is currently no evidence that would allow a jury to find Zimmerman guilty, I am convinced that she has some. Otherwise, I don’t believe she would have charged him. This was my suspicion, too, when Corey announced the charge of second degree murder (which shocked me.) My immediate reaction was “She’s got the goods on him and isn’t showing her hole cards yet.” But public figures have made amazingly dumb mistakes before, and until we know what evidence she has, there’s really no way to know what they have on Zimmerman. The information that was filed was rather stunningly short on evidence beyond “This guy shot this other guy.” ---
**Author:** ![David42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/582 "2012-06-11T04:02:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Not quite the formula I would use. > > If the state presents no evidence for an element of the crime, and the defendant testifies that the element did not happen, the jury may not disbelieve the testimony and thereby conclude that this element happened. First, this should usually get cured by directed verdict before the defense even puts on a case. A judge should do it sua sponte if he sees it–and it’s nearly automatic for an attorney to move for it even for the less than glaringly obvious missing element. So even if it does, what you say could be true in some cases. But it would really depend on the testimony given on a case by case basis. If a defendant lies in such a manner as to constitute an admission, that can be considered by the jury. In this case, Abel supplies what the prosecution was missing by placing himself in a position to know how the wallet got into the dumpster, we can still believe Abel knows about the wallet and the dumpster regardless of whether we believe his version of the wallet and the dumpster. I suppose if you still disagree we should look at cases. Shall we? Most likely be tommorrow before I get around to it. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/583 "2012-06-11T04:30:49Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > This was my suspicion, too, when Corey announced the charge of second degree murder (which shocked me.) My immediate reaction was “She’s got the goods on him and isn’t showing her hole cards yet.” > > But public figures have made amazingly dumb mistakes before, and until we know what evidence she has, there’s really no way to know what they have on Zimmerman. The information that was filed was rather stunningly short on evidence beyond “This guy shot this other guy.” Doesn’t the probable cause affidavit have to have some meat on it’s bones and include evidence on both sides of the case? Beyond the testimony of Trayvon’s mom that she thinks it’s his voice that’s a pretty weak case. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/584 "2012-06-11T04:35:49Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > The first link alone is about 45 min in length. It would be crazy of me to sit through that, not to mention all of the other tapes, just to engage you on this topic. > > …So why don’t you watch the videos? Come back and tell us what you learned. If there’s nothing to see, I’ll take your word for it. At 4:20 I believe I saw a baker chasing a woman in a clown suit. The baker then had the snot kicked out him by an incoherent martial arts expert. I may be mistaken. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/585 "2012-06-11T04:40:42Z")
> [@David42](#): > > What I’m really pointing out is that you are engaging in the appeal to authority fallacy in so doing. No, an appeal to authority fallacy is when one says “person x, who’s an authority says it, therefore _you_ must accept my statement is true”. What _I_ said is that “if authority x, whom I trust, says it, _I_ will accept that it’s true. You can make up your own mind”. That’s not a logical fallacy. That’s a necessary part of life. That’s _me_ accepting the word of someone I trust, on a subject that requires much more education on the subject in question than I have time to acquire. > [@](#): > > You should be looking to what you can verify yourself, and assuming the good faith of other dopers, rather than being suspicious, you can merely ask any of us to cite and that could be the end of whether you got good information or not. I’m not “suspicious”, I merely have no idea if you are an acceptable source. I can ask **Bricker** , which I did, and trust what he says, because I’m already aware of his expertise. But any random poster who’s expertise I’m unaware of, is capable of blowing smoke up my ass and I wouldn’t know it unless I took the time to research a complicated subject that takes years of education to master. I don’t have the time to acquire a law degree. I have to decide who’s word to trust on the matter. **Bricker** and several others at this board, I do. If you are, indeed, an expert in the subject, and show yourself to be so, over time, you’ll get added to that list. If you don’t, then you won’t. Take this example. I studied Chemistry. If I said something about Diehls-Alder reactions not working under certain circumstances, and Diehls and Alder were aware of that and mentioned it in their original paper, and you asked for cites, any cite I gave you, you would not even be able to _understand_ until you’d obtained for yourself at least the equivalent of a year and a half of study toward a Chem degree. You could take my word for it, or you could take the word of whatever authority I cited, but you would be unable to verify the statement for yourself without that year and a half of study. You might not even be able to _evaluate_ the qualifications of whatever authority I cited, without that. Same thing. > [@](#): > > it isn’t too hard to read court cases. > > I’ll show you plenty if you want to see. > > It may seem imtimidating but it’s really not that hard if you have an interest in it. I’ve read shitloads of court decisions. And talked/messaged to acquaintances, friends, and relatives who are lawyers. What I learned from that lets me know who’s blowing smoke, and who is actually trustworthy. But I have neither the time, nor the inclination to research a complex subject that’s really not of much use to me after I do that. Much easier and quicker to ask a known (to me) expert. Especially when he’s willing to take the ten minutes to explain it well enough for my purposes. But any random schmoe on the internet doesn’t qualify as a trustable source for that purpose. I have to already know they are reliable. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/586 "2012-06-11T04:45:08Z")
This simplistic explaination was given to me decades ago by a Chicago trial attorney (I hope I remember it correctly). In order to have a criminal prosecution, you start with a prosecuting attorney who believes they have a case against a defendent. The case enters a completely EMPTY courtroom and a defense attorney, a judge, and a jury are added. Next, you add all evidence and testimony pertaining to the case. Only evidence presented in court and only the testimony given in court should be considered by the jury. All evidence and testimony is allowed to be cross-examined and rebutted, if that’s possible. The jury then retires to decide the guilt or innocence of the defendent. The State is supposed to build it’s case, step by step, in the courtroom. Every step. The judge will make a statement as to the charge(s) and the prosecutor will even have to provide evidence that Martin is dead and Zimmerman pulled the trigger. Baby steps until all the evidence is produced and cross examined. ---
**Author:** ![David42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/587 "2012-06-11T05:02:52Z")
> [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > Take this example. I studied Chemistry. If I said something about Diehls-Alder reactions not working under certain circumstances, and Diehls and Alder were aware of that and mentioned it in their original paper, and you asked for cites, any cite I gave you, you would not even be able to _understand_ until you’d obtained for yourself at least the equivalent of a year and a half of study toward a Chem degree. You could take my word for it, or you could take the word of whatever authority I cited, but you would be unable to verify the statement for yourself without that year and a half of study. You might not even be able to _evaluate_ the qualifications of whatever authority I cited, without that. Same thing. Dude for every brief in the appellate courts that worked there’s one that failed and they were all written by lawyers. Well, some by paralegals. **Bricker** is wrong sometimes, believe it or not, though he should always be taken seriously. \*\*Bricker’s \*\*say so is not an authority. Can you even prove he really is a lawyer? (Not that I wish to disturb any such reputation.) We’re all anonymous here and you’ve come to a board that isn’t based on bowing to Bricker’s authority to settle questions, even though some seek his advice. We prove what we say here, not, **Bricker** says so, so it’s right! it’s a community and some people could be insulted by implying **Bricker** is the only valid poster cause you darn well know he’s right! I’m here to fight ignorance, and the idea that the right answer can only come from **Bricker** isn’t all that whippy, tell the truth. Don’t get me wrong, i agree with more of what he says than disagree by far. And probably half of what I disagree with is because we’re not looking at things from the same angle. But if you believe anybody here is always right, and therefore no-one else should undertake to convince you, well… ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/588 "2012-06-11T05:57:36Z")
> [@David42](#): > > again could this be cited please, about the Harvard Professor and Corey’s threats? Trayvon Martin Prosecutor Rants and Whines About My Criticism Posted by Alan M. Dershowitz [http://frontpagemag.com/2012/06/06/trayvon-martin-prosecutor-rants-and-whines-about-my-criticism/](http://frontpagemag.com/2012/06/06/trayvon-martin-prosecutor-rants-and-whines-about-my-criticism/) ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/589 "2012-06-11T06:09:49Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > She did and the judge accepted it. > > Notice that no one who is conversant with _all the facts in this case_ has filed any motions to dismiss the charges against Zimmerman? If Dershowitz is so confident that Corey has overcharged Z, the person he should be faulting is O’Mara. It’s his job to keep his client out of jail, right? And if it’s so obvious that the charges are without merit, then it would be incompetent of O’Mara not to point that out to the court. > > And yet O’Mara hasn’t done so. > > Gee, I wonder why. I don’t know if O’Mara is a good lawyer or not. I don’t know what his win record is either. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/590 "2012-06-11T06:47:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Why isn’t his statement hearsay? > > Isn’t hearsay an out of court statement, offered into evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted? Zimmerman was read his Miranda rights at the Sanford Police station and he declined the chance to get a lawyer. Anything he said after that point “can and will be used against him in a court of law”. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/591 "2012-06-11T12:05:33Z")
> [@David42](#): > > I’m here to fight ignorance, and the idea that the right answer can only come from **Bricker** isn’t all that whippy, tell the truth. That isn’t what I said. I said there was a list of several I’ve come to trust, he just happened to be the one posting right then. This discussion is a hijack, so I’m dropping it. ---
**Author:** ![David42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/592 "2012-06-11T12:27:39Z")
> [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > That isn’t what I said. I said there was a list of several I’ve come to trust, he just happened to be the one posting right then. This discussion is a hijack, so I’m dropping it. Whatever. “I don’t believe it cause you’re not **Bricker** ” is still pretty weak here. ---
**Author:** ![David42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/593 "2012-06-11T12:35:48Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Trayvon Martin Prosecutor Rants and Whines About My Criticism > Posted by Alan M. Dershowitz > [http://frontpagemag.com/2012/06/06/trayvon-martin-prosecutor-rants-and-whines-about-my-criticism/](http://frontpagemag.com/2012/06/06/trayvon-martin-prosecutor-rants-and-whines-about-my-criticism/) Thx. After reading the link I agree this may be a serious issue. Serious enough perhaps for something to get reversed on appeal, if need be. And it goes against the idea that she is holding some smoking gun that we do not know about, but rather she intends to win this case by manipulation. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/594 "2012-06-11T13:07:06Z")
> [@David42](#): > > First, this should usually get cured by directed verdict before the defense even puts on a case. A judge should do it sua sponte if he sees it–and it’s nearly automatic for an attorney to move for it even for the less than glaringly obvious missing element. Agreed. Which is why I said I simply disagreed with the formula you presented. In actual practice, we don’t – or shouldn’t – ever get to the defense case. > [@](#): > > In this case, Abel supplies what the prosecution was missing by placing himself in a position to know how the wallet got into the dumpster, we can still believe Abel knows about the wallet and the dumpster regardless of whether we believe his version of the wallet and the dumpster. Disagree. (“Strongly!” in a nod to “A Few Good Men.”) Merely because he knows how the wallet in the dumpster is not sufficient evidence to conclude he struck Baker and took the wallet. I suppose, if he were charged with obstruction of justice, the jury’s disbelief of the clown story might be enough to convict him of misleading the police. But the jury can’t point to a single piece of evidence they relied upon to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he struck Baker, took the wallet, and asported it. > [@](#): > > I suppose if you still disagree we should look at cases. Shall we? Most likely be tommorrow before I get around to it. By all means. There’s an excellent discussion of the concept in _Jackson v. Virginia_, 443 US 307 (1979). In terms of cases actually dismissed under the standard enunciated in Jackson, let me offer up Ramsey v. Commonwealth, a 2008 Virginia case involving a stolen car. The evidence proved that a silver 1995 Honda Accord was stolen during the night of Deecmber 7, 2005, from a home in Virginia Beach, Virginia. Several days later, Dennis Wayne Mahoney Ramsey was arrested by police in Williamsburg, Virginia (a city about 30 minutes away from Virginia Beach) while driving that car, which was hotwired and had a broken steering column so it could be driven without a key. At trial, Ramsey’s ex-girlfriend testified that in December she remember him getting into a gray four-door vehicle as a front seat passenger; when showed a picture of the stolen car, she said it looked like that one.On cross, asked if she were sure that was the car, she said “It looked like that one, yes,” but she then testified she was not sure it was the exact car. Ramsey was tried in Virginia Beach for grand theft and receiving stolen property. He was convicted of the stolen property charge. On appeal, he argued that no sufficient evidence showed him in Virginia Beach with the stolen car. The appellate court agreed. The jury was not permitted to make the inferential leap that he knew the car was stolen as a passenger. As a driver, yes, but no evidence showed he drove the car in Virginia Beach – just in Williamsburg. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/595 "2012-06-11T13:18:54Z")
> [@David42](#): > > Thx. After reading the link I agree this may be a serious issue. Serious enough perhaps for something to get reversed on appeal, if need be. > > And it goes against the idea that she is holding some smoking gun that we do not know about, but rather she intends to win this case by manipulation. Quoting from Dershowitz’ column: > [@](#): > > Corey seems to believe that our criminal justice system is like a poker game in which the prosecution is entitled to show its cards only after the judge has decided to charge the defendant with second degree murder. That’s not the way the system is supposed to work and that’s not the way prosecutors are supposed to act. That a prosecutor would hide behind the claim that she did not have an obligation to tell the whole truth until after the judge ruled on probable cause displays a kind of gamesmanship in which prosecutors should not engage. He’s right. But this is the difference between a Harvard professor’s view of the world and a practitioner’s view of the world. Wake up, Professor: in the real world, some prosecutors often do exactly that. It’s not even eyebrow raising. If there’s not a statute compelling them to disclose, some prosecutors won’t disclose. I’ve worked with prosecutors who wouldn’t tell you what time it was unless you could prove it was _Brady_ ,material. Sure, it would be great if all prosecutors took the position he urges, but that’s not reality. His other point - that he has every right to criticize her – is of course correct. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/596 "2012-06-11T13:27:55Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > I don’t know if O’Mara is a good lawyer or not. I don’t know what his win record is either. And the judge who accepted the affidavit? He too is so incompetent that he let himself get steamrolled by Corey without so much as a peep in protest? And then there’s Corey’s boss(es), who presumably also had to look at the thing before it went out. To give credence to your opinion, I guess we have to assume they, along with O’Mara and the judge, are too 'tarded to recognize a baseless case when they see it. With so much incompetence clustered in one state, it’s a wonder they’re able to function at all. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/597 "2012-06-11T13:32:01Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > And the judge who accepted the affidavit? He too is so incompetent that he let himself get steamrolled by Corey without so much as a peep in protest? > > And then there’s Corey’s boss(es), who presumably also had to look at the thing before it went out. To give credence to your opinion, I guess we have to assume they, along with O’Mara and the judge, are too 'tarded to recognize a baseless case when they see it. > > With so much incompetence clustered in one state, it’s a wonder they’re able to function at all. Part of the criticism of the affidavit is that it fails to include exculpatory evidence. That’s not something the judge would know, since he has almost certainly not seen the evidence. And as I mentioned before, it’s not a matter of an illegal tactic – as to that flaw, Dershowitz is simply arguing that prosecutors shouldn’t do it. And he’s right – but they do. All over the nation. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/598 "2012-06-11T14:19:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Part of the criticism of the affidavit is that it fails to include exculpatory evidence. That’s not something the judge would know, since he has almost certainly not seen the evidence. Okay, but if this were a problem which made it a truly flawed affidavit, the judge should have rejected it. But he didn’t, so that tells me one of two things. Either the affidavit is fine and all this jibber jabber about it being insufficient is just that…jibber jabber. Or that the judge, and everyone else who has looked at and accepted it, is too incompetent to do their jobs correctly and should probably be disbarred. Call me crazy, but I’m leaning towards the first. I would take Dershowitz’s complaints more seriously if he didn’t seem to be fixated on Corey to the exclusion of everyone else. Attention whoring drama queen are words that come to mind. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/599 "2012-06-11T15:22:11Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Zimmerman was read his Miranda rights at the Sanford Police station and he declined the chance to get a lawyer. Anything he said after that point “can and will be used against him in a court of law”. Miranda rights are read at arrest? Zimmerman was not arrested. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2012, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/600 "2012-06-11T15:23:40Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Okay, but if this were a problem which made it a truly flawed affidavit, the judge should have rejected it. But he didn’t, so that tells me one of two things. > > Either the affidavit is fine and all this jibber jabber about it being insufficient is just that…jibber jabber. > > Or that the judge, and everyone else who has looked at and accepted it, is too incompetent to do their jobs correctly and should probably be disbarred. > > Call me crazy, but I’m leaning towards the first. > > I would take Dershowitz’s complaints more seriously if he didn’t seem to be fixated on Corey to the exclusion of everyone else. Attention whoring drama queen are words that come to mind. The judge can only work with the document that is handed him. The only person accountable for an incomplete affidavit is the Prosecutor. And given her behavior regarding Alan Dershowitz she is off to a remarkably bad start. It’s not the first time she’s threatened to sue someone who criticized her. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287.md?page=29) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287.md?page=31)