This is Florida. Your argument is invalid.
:
:
Why are you crying?
Not true. Zimmerman is charged with second degree murder, which means that he intended to kill Martin. He isn’t charged with premeditated murder. Frankly the precedents on premeditation.
Based on the prior history I’ve read, the guy is frigging boy scout.
Because there’s so much to do. I feel like Sisyphus, but with five or six boulders.
I have been trying to post each time I see a misstatement of the law, or a factual claim that doesn’t seem to have much in the way of support from the various bit sof leaked evidence.
I quoted those message, and started to write, addressing each of them, and then… then I sobbed.
ARGH!!
Really? You weren’t there in the first thread where Stoid and discussed the elements of second degree and how they don’t have to include an intent to kill?? Really??
I am trying to be polite here… but… REALLY???
Second degree murder is the killing of another person with either the intent to kill or the intent to inflict such serious bodily harm that death would be the likely result.
http://law.findlaw.com/state-laws/second-degree-murder/pennsylvania/
In addition, the prosecutor must prove that the defendant had a specific intent to kill.
All right, Bricker. What’s wrong with what I wrote here:
Or maybe you can just shed some light on what he legal definition of “ill will” is.
Well, you got me.
There’s just one thing I can’t figure out. How did Zimmerman transport Treyvon Martin to Maryland?
Or Pennsylvania?
See, the thing is, Terr, different states have different laws. What is second degree murder in one state may not be second degree murder in another. Since this death happened in Florida, you need to look at Florida law, not Maarylnad or Pennsylvania law.
And what does Florida law say? Well, we start with the statutes:
(emphasis, obviously, added)
OK?
Look, I don’t mean to be dismissive or rude. I really don’t, and I apologize if I’m coming off that way. But this is ground that was covered extensively by earlier conversations. I can’t help but be surprised that you somehow failed to notice it before. And linking to legal references from other states? Again, not mean, just really really surprised. You do understand that each state has its own laws, right?
Nm
That is what I read also, but the latest I’ve read is nobody knew about DeeDee until Tracy Martin went through Trayvon cellphone statement and found 400 minutes of calls to a number he didn’t recognize. One of the calls a few minutes before Trayvon died. I find it rather bizarre that Trayvon’s parents didn’t know about DeeDee. I don’t know if that is unusual or not in 2012. If this scenario is true, then Crumb only knew about her a few days before his announcement.
This does favor the people who are in the, “Sanford police are incompetent morons”, school for not getting the cell phone records. If Tracy Martin hadn’t gone through the cell records, then we might still not know about DeeDee.
This doesn’t preclude Crumb doing some reprogramming, but it might be hard to distinguish it from honest error.
I do think Zimmerman killed Martin unlawfully, and yet I think it exposes nothing about dangers private gun ownership. Now ask me if it exposes the dangers of SYG laws and you’ll get a different answer.
And a I doubt you would be able to tell the difference between a pushing match on grass and jogging or running. Background noise filtering on the phone is going to knock down or eliminate some of that noise and the rest is going to be kind of hard to decipher. Of course in hindsight it is a lot easier for the girlfriend to reconcile what those sounds were.
So you have come over to my side of the table now?
Before you were adamant that Zimmerman murdered Martin so that he would not be exposed as a gun wielding nutcase.
Happy to.
At least this is a new one.
And at least your instinct to hit the dictionary is not a terrible one. Without any other references, courts will absolutely use the ordinary meaning of words, and that sometimes means turning to a dictionary.
But in this case, there is more. There are the jury instructions, given to juries facing second degree murder deliberations to help them parse out what to do. And there’s the body of prior second degree murder cases that have been decided already and that help flesh out the meaning of the words used.
In fact, the words “ill will” themselves don’t come from the statute, but from Florida Standard Jury Instructions (Criminal) 66:
In State v. Ellison, 561 So.2d 576 (1990), the Florida Supreme Court agreed that Ellison’s second degree murder conviction should be reduced to manslaughter because there was insufficient evidence of spite, hatred, or ill will. Ellison had stolen a car and refused to stop for police, ending a high-speed chase by killing a sixteen-month old baby in a head-on collision.
In Marasa v. State, 394 So.2d 544 (1981), the court of appeals found manslaughter, and not second degree murder, when the victim was drunk and stoned at a party. After one partygoer said about the victim, “Hit her – she won’t feel a thing!” the accused said, “I have a better idea,” and pointed the gun at the victim, shooting and killing her, according to him, by careless accident.
In Hines v. State, 227 So. 2d 334 (1969), the court of appeals wrote in affirming a second degree murder conviction that the the requirement is evidence showing genuine malice and hatred moved by willful design.
All of these, and many other cases, show that the requirement is more than simple “unfriendly feeling.” The words hatred and depraved are better guidelines.
Wait, are you suggesting that Crumb had Dee-dee modify her account of what she heard? That he is gambling his license to practice on the hope that a sixteen-year-old girl didn’t relate her unmodified story to anyone else before she was counselled to commit perjury?
Golly, what an idiot!
Premeditation and intent to kill are two different things. You may intend to kill at the moment without premeditation before.
I do but I thought the definitions of things like murder second degree would be similar across states.
I find it unfortunate for the reason you give and because investigators didn’t get to her before Crump.
Idk what sop is for a homicide investigation. So my opinion is entirely a “What a shame” one rather than a “The investigators were negligent or worse.”
Idc about when he revealed it to the press.
I am more interested about when he revealed it to the “proper authorities”
Where does premeditation enter here? Police officers don’t go around planning to kill people. You react to a motion and you shoot an unarmed man. No premeditation, just a mistake.
Zimmerman is enraged by Martin and he pulls his gun to shoot Martin. Martin tackles him and they wrestle on the ground and Zimmerman finally shoots him. Still not premeditation.
Zimmerman pulling his gun and trying to arrest Martin, isn’t 2nd degree murder, it is manslaughter. Maybe you ask yourself about what kind of evidence Angela Corey might have that actually supports 2nd degree.
“The day after his wake, Trayvon’s family attorney, Benjamin Crump, who had been conducting his own extensive investigation because cops had determined the shooting was in self defense, told Trayvon’s girlfriend she was the last person to talk to him,” a source close to the situation tells RadarOnline.com. "George had reviewed Trayvon’s cell phone bill and it was revealed that she was on the phone with him in the moments before Trayvan was shot.
The wake was March 3rd. First time the girlfriend’s testimony about the call was trotted out to the press was somewhere in March 20s.
So - no, it was not just a few days before the announcement. He sat on it for weeks. I am sure this will come out at the trial as well.
Consider these two possibilities. And let’s say that the State has compelling evidence to support both:
-
Martin wasn’t beating Zimmerman as he claims he was, rather Zimmerman was holding him at gun point to keep him from moving
-
Martin was yelling his head off for help. It was his anguished, frightened voice on that 911 tape.
Question: if these two things are true, why then would Zimmerman shoot Martin in the chest? The kid wasn’t causing him any harm or threatening his life, so it couldn’t have been for self-defense.
So maybe he just pulled the trigger by accident? That’s possible. But then why would he show a guilty consciousness by lying about how the whole conflict went down? Why would he lie and say it was him who had been yelling for help? Why would he lie about not pulling his gun out? Well, because he didn’t want to get in trouble, you say. Okay. That’s one explanation. Which would make the appropriate charge manslaughter.
But there’s another possibility: He shot Martin because Martin was screaming and causing a scene that threatened to expose Zimmerman’s unlawful conduct. So Zimmerman made the snap decision to kill the kid and then protect himself with a lie. That lie being that Martin had essentially forced Zimmerman–a completely innocent and law-abiding man who had done absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, your Honor–into shooting Martin by violently attacking him and making him fear for his life. And the way Zimmerman saw it, he needed to make this shooting a fatal one, or else Martin could mess everything up by telling the world the truth. So bang.
In this situation, the appropriate charge would be murder-2, because Zimmerman deliberately killed Martin for self-serving reasons.
The State really doesn’t have anything to lose by charging Zimmerman with second degree murder, because manslaughter is still on the table.
(And this is speculation, but I’m sure Zimmerman’s ego took a hit when he finally realized he had misjudged the kid as no good; after all, do burglars yells for help like helpless teenaged boys? No, they don’t. This epiphany might have caused some major cognitive dissonance on Zimmerman’s part, and the best way he saw to relieve the resulting mental discomfort was to kill the boy and then convince himself (and others) that it was because he had acted violently. This way, he never has to acknowledge he’d been wrong to target the kid in the place.)