nm
Ah, the celebration of vigilante justice. How ironically unedifying.
I couldn’t see anything in that article about a lynch mob or any motive for this shooting.
Personally, I from what we know about this guy, my first guess is that he pissed someone off in an unrelated incident. Of course, that’s only a guess.
Sneers the guy with the Zimmy shrine in his basement armory.
The news story sucks for several reasons. For instance, it once again brings up the entirely-unrelated-to-any-Zimmerman-case “Stand Your Ground” law.
And while Zimmerman is an idiot with anger-management issues, that’s insufficient cause to applaud the attempted murder of him.
Don’t be silly. I don’t have a basement.
Well you suck for several reasons as well. It’s unreasonable to expect a detailed article for an incident that occurred a few hours ago. Better to withhold judgment on the news story for the time being.
Not clear really: “Stand Your Ground” Did Indeed Play a Role in the Zimmerman Trial – Mother Jones
Ya think?
I actually agree with this, but it’s not unreasonable to point out the workings of karma.
Anyhoo FTR, the police initially thought road rage was involved, but now they have the name of the perp, who apparently knew the victim. It would be wrong to assume this was a political assassination. It’s too early to draw such conclusions. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/11/us-usa-florida-zimmerman-idUSKBN0NW1UC20150511
ETA: Methinks I over-reacted to Unpronounceable. Somewhat. I suck too!
I guess that guesses are welcome unless it’s a guess about lynch mobs or lynch mob mentalities.
Someone shot a Zimmerman. The lynch mobs begin their celebration. Life goes on.
(post shortened)
I guess the author of the Mother Jones article received some legal advice, from lawyers no less, who disagree with the authors misrepresentation of the legal issue. But the didn’t stop the author from continuing to 2nd guess the law. Everyone should have a hobby.
UPDATE: Hmmm. I’m getting some pushback from lawyer types who say that the judge’s instructions are based on common law, not SYG. Maybe. But Judge Nelson had to know that SYG had been the subject of enormous public scrutiny over the past year. It’s hard to believe she’d use the phrase without clarification if she was basing her instructions solely on common law.
eh, no worries.
There have been two other cases where this other person (identified here as Matthew Apperson) has been involved with Zimmerman:
[QUOTE=NPR]
Apperson apparently has a history with Zimmerman: In September, he said that Zimmerman had threatened him as he drove on a road in Lake Mary. At the time, Apperson told a dispatcher that Zimmerman “said he was going to shoot me dead,” according to The Orlando Sentinel.
The newspaper adds that in that case and another that followed soon after, Apperson did not press charges.
[/QUOTE]
As much as I have little to no sympathy with Mr. Z, it looks like this guy might be stalking him or out to get him in some way. I wonder if there is any proof that Zimmerman also fired on him (which he would have been smarter not to do, but being smart is not one of his hallmarks, IMO).
Interesting, given the take could just as easily be that it’s the other way around, if not a mutual thing.
How long till this guy gets his own “reality show”?
The fact that this even needs to be pointed out is Reason #6452 why the SDMB isn’t as smart as it proclaims to be.
Why is it hard to believe?
I ask because I suspect your “hard to believe” is based on a less than complete understanding for the role instructions have in the appellate process. Specifically, a judge’s deviation from standard instructions rolls the dice much more so than the use of the pattern instructions. A judge simply has to ensure that the instructions accurately state the law. There’s really nothing in the picture about “enormous public scrutiny” and a judge has no role in shaping overall public understanding of these issues.
That’s not necessarily his opinion, it’s the addendum to the MJ article.
So, are the instructions in the link standard instructions? Because if they are not, that would tend to support Drum’s contention. Link: “Stand Your Ground” Did Indeed Play a Role in the Zimmerman Trial – Mother Jones
Specifically, I’m wondering whether these are standard instructions on a common law basis: [INDENT][INDENT] If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. [/INDENT][/INDENT] Also, FTR Drum tends to be an honest broker. If experts correct him, he reports that.
Sorry – I was wrong to mix issues and wronger to imply without first checking that the instructions were based on the common law. (Although in an effort to somewhat salvage myself, I did correctly affirm that the judge’s responsibility is for the instructions to accurately state the law, as opposed to explain the source of the law as statutory as opposed to common).
But that’s just hedging. The instructions you quote are the statutory Florida law, not the common law, and moreover the statutory law which includes the section commonly referred to as “Stand Your Ground.” At common law, the jury would have heard that Zimmerman had a duty to retreat, if he could have done so in complete safety, unless he was in his own home.
My mistake. I was wrong.
ETA: In re-reading the Drum article, perhaps there’s confusion over “SYG.” There are two parts to it: the immunity provisions, which did indeed play no part, and the abrogation of the duty to retreat, which was a factor.
Sorry I wasn’t more clear. The “hard to believe” UPDATE cut-and-paste was from the same Kevin Drum’s motherjones article linked by Measure for Measure in post 967.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dru...immerman-trial
Apparently, in spite of having received free legal advice concerning his article, via the internet, from lawyers, Kevin Drum still suspects that Zimmerman’s defense was based on SYG.
Personally, I believe Kevin Drum is biased, and full of shit.