# 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:** 39
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2012, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/761 "2012-06-19T21:53:30Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > Punching someone because they followed you by car and chased you down in the dark and appear combative is not clearly a violation of the law, it may have been but it is not as obvious as you claim it is. > > Most reasonable people would view themselves as in danger in Martin’s situation. he didn’t follow him by car. His vehicle was parked. Martin was observed hanging around the clubhouse at night which is a suspicious act. He then walked less than 300 feet to Zimmerman’s truck where they both stared at each other. Martin then ran off. Again, a suspicious thing to do. If most reasonable people would view themselves in danger then by extension they would seek safety. Martin was less than 300 feet from his house when the altercation took place. He chose not to go home. He also didn’t just punch Zimmerman. He beat him for a significant period of time. ---
**Author:** ![BlankSlate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blankslate/32/80_2.png) [@BlankSlate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlankSlate)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2012, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/762 "2012-06-19T22:13:48Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > …He also didn’t just punch Zimmerman. He beat him for a significant period of time. You can post this fantasy a million times, which you seem intent on doing, and it still comes nowhere near being an established fact. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2012, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/763 "2012-06-19T22:43:34Z")
> [@BlankSlate](#): > > You can post this fantasy a million times, which you seem intent on doing, and it still comes nowhere near being an established fact. There are the injuries to Zimmerman, Zimmerman’s story, and at least one eyewitness that says Martin was beating Zimmerman. You, of course, have your “feelings” as proof that something else happened. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2012, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/764 "2012-06-19T23:16:48Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > Punching someone because they followed you by car and chased you down in the dark and appear combative is not clearly a violation of the law, it may have been but it is not as obvious as you claim it is. > > Most reasonable people would view themselves as in danger in Martin’s situation. Life threatening danger? There’s a difference. Was Martin in imminent danger, meaning he assumed his attacker’s apparent intent was to cause great bodily injury or death? Florida law doesn’t allow you beat someone simply for watching you and then getting out of their vehicle. Even asking someone what they are doing in the neighborhood does not allow for the use of lethal force. Neither man did anything illegal or life theatening until the first punch was thrown. Did Zimmerman’s asking why Martin was there equate to imminent danger? It’s Zimmerman’s contention that Martin’s continued beating of Zimmerman caused Zimmerman to believe that he was in imminent danger. That’s why he resorted to lethal force after his cries for help from his neighbors went unaided. Is there an eyewitness that says this didn’t occur? Can the police produce evidence that something else occured? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/765 "2012-06-20T00:03:11Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > Well that is my point…if he were alive. > > Obviously when you claim self defense you are in most cases admitting to the act. > > I would think assigning culpability is of little use if the target of the investigation is incapable of being charged and punished for the crime. > > I thought the original intent of this thread was to examine if Trayvon had a right to act with force. Had he survived and presented his side I personally find it likely that he would have been able to justify his acts as self defense. > > I do not understand why everyone tries to exclude the buildup to the combat, it does directly relate to what actions a sound person would do…or the Terminator was a snuff film Well, sure. If he could testify, he most likely would be able to say something that a jury could latch on to to justify his striking first – or offer up a claim that he did not strike first. But if we examine the question based on the evidence adduced so far, we don’t have that. We can imagine that he could – almost certainly WOULD-- be able to give us that crucial piece… but that doesn’t bring it into being. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/766 "2012-06-20T00:36:17Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Life threatening danger? There’s a difference. Was Martin in imminent danger, meaning he assumed his attacker’s apparent intent was to cause great bodily injury or death? Florida law doesn’t allow you beat someone simply for watching you and then getting out of their vehicle. Even asking someone what they are doing in the neighborhood does not allow for the use of lethal force. > > Neither man did anything illegal or life theatening until the first punch was thrown. > > Did Zimmerman’s asking why Martin was there equate to imminent danger? > > It’s Zimmerman’s contention that Martin’s continued beating of Zimmerman caused Zimmerman to believe that he was in imminent danger. That’s why he resorted to lethal force after his cries for help from his neighbors went unaided. > > Is there an eyewitness that says this didn’t occur? Can the police produce evidence that something else occured? Yes…this is what you keep arguing, assuming my position in the matter and ignoring both the statue and the case law. It may be useful if you note and maybe Google the phrase “reasonable person” this is a legal term and has meaning. Go back and look at the code Bickler just quoted and look for it, neither person needed to be doing something actually illegal to justify the use of force, note I don’t see proof yet that it was deadly force in the case of Martin yet. FYI if you care and wish to stop shoving your assumptions onto a strawman here is what think. With the information I have I think Zimmerman should have been **CHARGED** with **manslaughter** due to the death being caused by “culpable negligence”. I do not claim to know if he is guilty or not please do not infer that I do. And so you don’t misstate my position I doubt he will be convicted of **murder** but he does not qualify for **Excusable Homicide** because he being the “block captain” should have known how stupid it is to chase someone down in the dark among other reasons. He was charged with Second degree murder because of “recklessly dangerous acts with a ‘depraved mind’” but I would put a bet on that charge being rejected by a jury with what little we know now. [ > [@](#): > > An aggravated assault is an “assault” with a deadly weapon without > intent to kill or with an intent to commit a felony. § 784.021, Fla. Stat. ]([https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:9GY-Mnn8qogJ:www.4dca.org/Oct%25202006/10-11-06/4D04-4838.op.pdf+florida+elements+aggrivated+battery&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgLUl95Oo76tNbcFefeiKbwbiKhPO94sRfX4yLW1DmplpdFIwGUaEPRiocv5Kw6oN8Y37yeEtbMu\_yf5FkHl0kDk-VCZQSIU4QxZMYN1q-bToq5FQBmBjqXoWbaVZ00UN4SM8f7&sig=AHIEtbS2AKrCQCKfXx4hlEpMdjOMOwUMaw](https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:9GY-Mnn8qogJ:www.4dca.org/Oct%25202006/10-11-06/4D04-4838.op.pdf+florida+elements+aggrivated+battery&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgLUl95Oo76tNbcFefeiKbwbiKhPO94sRfX4yLW1DmplpdFIwGUaEPRiocv5Kw6oN8Y37yeEtbMu_yf5FkHl0kDk-VCZQSIU4QxZMYN1q-bToq5FQBmBjqXoWbaVZ00UN4SM8f7&sig=AHIEtbS2AKrCQCKfXx4hlEpMdjOMOwUMaw)) You are ignoring the crime of assault, there is no middle school first puncher rule, you can break laws with threats. There is no evidence for this but if Zimmerman brandished his firearm or if Martin saw it and thought he was (even if he was holding to keep it in a cheap holster) he may have thought we was brandishing it. > [@](#): > > An “assault” is “an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do > violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do > so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other > person that such violence is imminent.” § 784.011(1), Fla. Stat. See that…no physical contact required!! not that we have proof that Zimmerman did have a threat but we are lacking one side of the story and this thread was talking about “if’s” So let us go back to aggravated assult, remember the use of force statue? > [@](#): > > 776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if: > (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another **or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony** ; or > (2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013. > History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1188, ch. 97-102; s. 2, ch. 2005-27. Note the part I changed to bold about forcible felonies? > [@](#): > > 776.08 Forcible felony.—“Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; **aggravated assault** ; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual. It doesn’t matter who hit first, the threat is enough to justify the use of force. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/767 "2012-06-20T00:54:09Z")
The “a forcible felony” part was meant to show he had no duty to retreat sorry. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/768 "2012-06-20T01:01:13Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > It doesn’t matter who hit first, the threat is enough to justify the use of force. Absolutely correct. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/769 "2012-06-20T02:05:03Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > It doesn’t matter who hit first, the threat is enough to justify the use of force. there is nothing in the conversation that posed a threat. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/770 "2012-06-20T02:52:12Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > there is nothing in the conversation that posed a threat. Other than it being a result of Zimmerman following him around like a creeper, on a dark rainy night, despite Martin’s attempts to get away. ---
**Author:** ![stw004](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@stw004](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stw004)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/771 "2012-06-20T04:04:06Z")
If evidence is provided at trial that Zimmerman laid hands on Martin prior to any punches thrown will that evidence negate/harm Zimmerman’s ability to claim SYG as an affirmative defense? I have a sneaking suspicion that the prosecution might have a text somewhere that says “I grabbed his (Martin’s) arm”, or something along those lines. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/772 "2012-06-20T04:07:10Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Other than it being a result of Zimmerman following him around like a creeper, on a dark rainy night, despite Martin’s attempts to get away. I’m sure you meant to type “despite Martin’s complete failure to attempt to get away” there, as if he had wanted to get away, he would have been back at the house he was staying in, not waiting for Zimmerman. Also, what do you mean following him “like a creeper”? There’s nothing creepy about keeping an eye on someone so the police can find them. Stupid and dangerous, as it’s proved, but not creepy. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/773 "2012-06-20T05:41:51Z")
> [@stw004](#): > > If evidence is provided at trial that Zimmerman laid hands on Martin prior to any punches thrown will that evidence negate/harm Zimmerman’s ability to claim SYG as an affirmative defense? Not really. The “aggressor” clause is still there, and if Zimmerman’s defense can show that he reasonably believed that he was imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, he will walk (since when you’re lying on the ground and someone is sitting on you beating you up, escaping is not an option anymore) no matter who initiated the physical confrontation. > [@](#): > > I have a sneaking suspicion that the prosecution might have a text somewhere that says “I grabbed his (Martin’s) arm”, or something along those lines. See above. They can have a text like that and Zimmerman still walks on self-defense. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/774 "2012-06-20T06:21:07Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > Go back and look at the code Bickler just quoted and look for it, neither person needed to be doing something actually illegal to justify the use of force, note I don’t see proof yet that it was deadly force in the case of Martin yet. > > … **You are ignoring the crime of assault** , there is no middle school first puncher rule, you can break laws with threats. There is no evidence for this but if Zimmerman brandished his firearm or if Martin saw it and thought he was (even if he was holding to keep it in a cheap holster) he may have thought we was brandishing it. > > …See that…no physical contact required!! **not that we have proof that Zimmerman did have a threat** but we are lacking one side of the story and this thread was talking about “if’s” > > …So let us go back to aggravated assult, remember the use of force statue? > > …It doesn’t matter who hit first, the threat is enough to justify the use of force. Let’s look at what Bricker said. > [@Bricker](#): > > Florida does use the reasonable person standard. > > But in order to make a finding under that standard, **there must be some evidence upon which to rest it**. In other words, as with any fact, **the finder of fact cannot simply decide it’s so – they must be able to point to evidence in the record**. > > …But **they can’t create the imminent violence finding from no evidence at all**. They can’t find that the mere fact of someone approaching you is imminent violence, without something more. That’s simply the way fact-finding works. > > Let’s put it this way: if Treyvon were on trial for striking Zimmerman, and the only thing he said was: “I approached Zimmerman **and he had an aggressive body posture** ,” then he would not be entitled to a self-defense instruction. If you were approaching someone in a threatening manner that could be considered an illegal act. No physical contact required. Except in this case, neither man seems to have been assuming a threatening posture (assult). Neither man did anything illegal. Until Martin began punching Zimmerman. Punching would be considered a violation of FLA law. Martin approached Zimmerman from behind. Would Martin approach to within arms reach of Zimmerman if Zimmerman was assuming a threatening posture? The two men exchanged words. That’s not illegal. “What are you doing here,” is not what a “reasonable man” would consider a threatening question. Punching someone because you don’t like their questions, or answers, or breath is not something a “reasonable man” would do. Beating a man while he cries out for help from his neighbors would lead a “reasonable man” to decide that the man who was being beaten was actually in danger of losing his life. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/775 "2012-06-20T07:41:04Z")
> [@stw004](#): > > If evidence is provided at trial that Zimmerman laid hands on Martin prior to any punches thrown will that evidence negate/harm Zimmerman’s ability to claim SYG as an affirmative defense? > > I have a sneaking suspicion that the prosecution might have a text somewhere that says “I grabbed his (Martin’s) arm”, or something along those lines. [From the horse’s mouth, SYG does not apply in this case at all except in the mind of the media.](http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/21/trayvon-martins-alleged-attacker-not-covered-under-law-wrote/) ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/776 "2012-06-20T07:44:38Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Let’s look at what Bricker said. > > If you were approaching someone in a threatening manner that could be considered an illegal act. No physical contact required. > > Except in this case, neither man seems to have been assuming a threatening posture (assult). Neither man did anything illegal. Until Martin began punching Zimmerman. Punching would be considered a violation of FLA law. > > Martin approached Zimmerman from behind. Would Martin approach to within arms reach of Zimmerman if Zimmerman was assuming a threatening posture? The two men exchanged words. That’s not illegal. “What are you doing here,” is not what a “reasonable man” would consider a threatening question. > > Punching someone because you don’t like their questions, or answers, or breath is not something a “reasonable man” would do. > > Beating a man while he cries out for help from his neighbors would lead a “reasonable man” to decide that the man who was being beaten was actually in danger of losing his life. Remember, had Trayvon been the one that lived it would be his statements we would be basing this one, Zimmerman would be silent on the subject besides the 911 call. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 9:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/777 "2012-06-20T09:01:13Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Other than it being a result of Zimmerman following him around like a creeper, on a dark rainy night, despite Martin’s attempts to get away. In a trial of Zimmerman, “following someone around like a creeper, on a dark rainy night, despite Martin’s attempts to get away” does not contain enough information for a jury to find an imminent threat committed by Zimmerman. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 9:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/778 "2012-06-20T09:07:41Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > [From the horse’s mouth, SYG does not apply in this case at all except in the mind of the media.](http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/21/trayvon-martins-alleged-attacker-not-covered-under-law-wrote/) Unfortunately, he’s not a lawyer. He’s a funeral director. He may believe that his law doesn’t apply. But the courts do not interpret law by going back and checking with the author of the law. [Can you explain this outcome?](http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/03/22/149153379/stand-your-ground-miami-judge-decides-fatal-stabbing-was-self-defense) if what the horse’s mouth says is true, that is: > [@](#): > > Back in January, Garcia, 25, saw Pedro Roteta, 26, trying to steal the radio from his truck, which was parked outside Garcia’s Miami apartment. Garcia grabbed a large knife, ran downstairs and chased Roteta for at least a block. The incident was caught on tape and showed that Garcia stabbed Roteta to death. At the time Roteta was carrying a bag with stolen radios “but no weapon other than a pocketknife, which was unopened in his pocket and which police said he never brandished.” > > The Herald reports that a judge threw out the charges against Garcia, citing the state’s “stand your ground” law. As we reported earlier this week, the law did away with “the English Law concept of ‘duty to retreat’ from a situation that is dangerous outside your home.” The Florida Supreme Court also decided that it should be a judge, not a jury, who decides whether to grant a suspect immunity based on the law. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/779 "2012-06-20T14:05:51Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > [From the horse’s mouth, SYG does not apply in this case at all except in the mind of the media.](http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/21/trayvon-martins-alleged-attacker-not-covered-under-law-wrote/) I suggest this came from the other end of the horse. Baxley seems a bit confused about the laws he helped pass and who said what that evening. I’m sure he’s figured it out by now. \*…I would like to emphasize that the approach that is currently developing in this situation, **to convene a grand jury** , is the proper one in which to discern the facts of this case. I certainly agree with everyone that justice must be served. During the debate concerning this incident, some have brought into question the “Stand Your Ground” law, **more commonly referred to as the “castle doctrine,”** which has been used by the attacker to pardon his actions. …Quite simply the castle doctrine is a good law which now protects individuals in a majority of states. However, the castle doctrine does not provide protection to individuals **who seek to pursue and confront others** , as is allegedly the case in the Trayvon Martin tragedy in Sanford. …There is no protection in the “Stand Your Ground” law for anyone who pursues and confronts people. By Rep. Dennis Baxley\* Corey decided that she don’t need no stinkin’ Grand Jury to convict Zimmerman. SYG is not the Castle doctrine. After Martin was seen running away, meaning that the two men were no longer in contact with each other, the next confrontation was initiated by Martin who was “pursuing and confronting” Zimmerman. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287/780 "2012-06-20T14:33:04Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > Remember, had Trayvon been the one that lived it would be his statements we would be basing this one, Zimmerman would be silent on the subject besides the 911 call. OK, if things were different then things would be different. If Corey can produce evidence that Zimmerman’s version of what happened that evening did not or could not have happened that evening, it’s likely that Zimmerman is going to be found guilty of 2nd degree murder. If Zimmerman had approached Martin and attempted to detain him, Martin would be justified in punching Zimmerman. If Zimmerman had verbally threatened to maim or kill Martin, Martin would be justified in punching Zimmerman. If Zimmerman had approached Martin with his weapon drawn, Martin would be justified in punching Zimmerman if the opportunity arose. And continuing to beat Zimmerman until the threat of imminent danger of death or great bodily harm no longer existed. Martin could also claim that he had no intention of killing Zimmerman and only applied sufficient force to save his own life. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287.md?page=38) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-trayvon-martin-have-the-right-to-stand-his-own-ground/622287.md?page=40)