Read what I wrote carefully
SYG ground doesn’t protect you if your self defense claim is BS. Angela Corey had Brad Lippincott arrested the next day after he shot Kahron Ali Warnke.
Maybe you should explain exactly what would have happened differently before the SYG law was enacted that is different from what I said. As I already mentioned the civil immunity is actually new and different.
Sure.
In the common law scheme, self-defense is an affirmative defense at trial. To arrest, the police need only develop probable cause to believe a crime was committed. The jury hears your claim in the context of the trial.
Under § 776.032, police need to have specific probable cause to believe the force used was unlawful, as opposed to overall probable cause about a crime, and without it they cannot arrest, detain in custody, or prosecute. This is more than simply not having to worry about bail: it confers immunity from prosecution. If you are charged, before the jury begins hearing your case, the judge must decide if probable cause on the force issue alone was present. If not, you’re free, no trial.
Hampers investigation, and restricts conviction.
No, Martin got shot because he reacted to an innocuous question about what he was doing by physically attacking the shorter man, confident that his towering 6’3" frame gave him the advantage over the diminutive 5’9" Martin.
Or maybe not. I don’t actually know.
But neither do you, so how you can say Martin was shot because of what Zimmerman did, regardless of what Martin did? That’s why we ask about what was illegal in Zimmerman’s actions: Zimmerman is entitled to go up to someone and ask what they’re doing, and doesn’t deserve to get punched in the nose for doing it. Did that happen? I don’t know. Neither do you.
Or did Zimmerman provoke the situation by getting out of his car with a gun to follow Martin who was doing nothing wrong and Martin get shot for it regardless of how Martin reacted to the confrontation? I don’t know, and neither do you.
George Zimmerman provoked the retaliation. Yes, it is OK to pop him in the mouth for acting like an asshole. And no, he cannot pull a gun and blow away anyone who punches him for being a dick.
If it happened just the way you described, Zimmerman got what he deserved, and has no right to use a gun to kill Martin. If he wants to fight back and punch Martin, that is justified, but escalating a fist fight to a one-sided execution with a gun should be prosecuted as some level of manslaughter. In my opinion.
Newsflash: Zimmerman’s lawyers both just quit. They have lost contact with him. They have not spoken to him since Sunday, and he is not returning their phone calls.
Are you saying that the police could have proceeded to arrest and prosecute Zimmerman for some lesser charge like firing his gun inside city limits even though they didn’t have probable cause on the homicide alone? I could see that in a case where the lesser charges are serious like if Zimmerman was a convicted felon, who didn’t have a right to own, much less carry firearms. I’m not sure how it really applies in this case. I’m not sure how you are saying that it okay it is okay to do ahead to prosecute Zimmerman without probable cause for the Homicide.
Or maybe I don’t understand what you are say at all. Maybe you need to be a little more concrete.
How do states without the SYG law do it? I’m no legal expert, but for starters, we need to completely eliminate the presumption of innocence. If a man is dead and the only other witness is the living shooter, the police should not do as in this case and presume innocence and let him go. They need to put him under arrest and investigate the incident from all possible angles. How it would apply in this case would be that GZ would have been arrested immediately, booked, and his belongings and everything else confiscated as evidence. The police would canvass for witnesses and do whatever tests they need to do in order to determine if GZ’s side of the story, that he was being straddled and pummeled, holds up. That’s really all I wanted from this case from the beginning.
The fact that GZ is walking around simply because he shot the only other witness and claimed self defense is not enough justification to let him go. That is my problem with the SYG law.
If things really happened as he said, after the investigation, he would be freed following police support of his version of the story. But don’t let him get out, go into hiding, put out websites attesting to his innocence without being formally charged first.
I’m confused. You are certain this is a racially motivated slaying. Premeditated essentially. Which would make the SYG law irrelevant. Yet you think the SYG law should be repealed?
Personally I think this was a heat of the moment slaying. And for the record I think a person has a duty to retreat before applying deadly force.
Listen to the 911 tape. They were fighting for at least 45 seconds before the gun went off. It wasn’t just a punch in the nose. Stop making straw man arguements. BTW, do you really thing it is okay to punch total strangers in the nose? I don’t even honk my horn at people that cut me off anymore. Of course in Florida it is easier to remember when you realize that people don’t even need a CCW to carry a firearm in their car.
Instead I adopted the Greater Asshole theory. For every asshole there is a even bigger asshole that he is going to run into someday. I find it quite comforting. Of course I know that this implies that somewhere there is a uber asshole, but what are my chances of meeting him?
Zimmerman was not a total stranger to Martin; he went out of his way to harrass Martin based on unfounded profiling. Ziimerman would have expected that kind of reaction, had his ego not been inflated by the presence of a semi-automaitc in his waistband.
This is interesting. I wonder if Zimmerman is still alive? I considered the most favorable possible outcome of the situation was for Zimmerman to commit suicide, but I figured that was a long shot since he was Catholic. I guess we need to find out if Zimmerman’s father or brother have talked to him today.
It’s not always possible to retreat. For instance, if someone were sitting on your chest pounding your head into the ground, it would be difficult or impossible to retreat. In that situation, SYG wouldn’t make any difference.
Regards,
Shodan
It seems from this story that his lawyers may have been informed that they’re no longer his lawyers by the prosecutor’s office. Zimmerman apparently contected the prosectors directly and informed them that the two attorney weren’t his lawyers, and suggested they were never his lawyers, merely his “legal advisors”.
Also, the lawyers said Zimmerman had contacted Sean Hannity, though there was no comment on what he might have said.
I think he may be cracking under pressure, and just unable to play it smart an keep his mouth shut.
Er, no. Just, no. It always is, and must remain, the job of the state to prove someone is guilty before they are punished. Otherwise, we might as well lock you up as well. I mean, I don’t have to presume innocence, and you’re probably guilty of something.
What benefit would be gained by having Zimmerman locked up now, that would not also be gained by locking him up after a trial, if it turns out he’s guilty? Placating a violent, ignorant mob is not an acceptable answer here.
Apparently Zimmerman updated his web site at 1:30PM.
Yes I am pretty sure the court would find in your favor in this instance. I know of no duty to retreat clauses that are exception-less. In practice it is a reasonable measure to ensure people don’t shoot first and asses the situation later.
Ok.
Well, just so we’re clear, the law doesn’t match your opinion. And although I think the Florida version of the SYG concept is fatally flawed, I don’t subscribe to your version either. Merely stepping up to someone and demanding to know what they’re doing is not license for your subject to punch you… Both in my opinion, and in the law of pretty much every state.
But I appreciate your forthright approach to the discussion.
Now his former legal adviser said he isn’t in Florida.
http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120410/NEWS90/120419977/-1/NEWS
I’ll give it another shot.
Under “normal” rules, self-defense gets used as a defense at trial. Even if a person tells the police a shooting was self-defense, the police don’t need to disprove that claim. The only thing police need to do is find probable cause that Z killed M. Self-defense doesn’t have to enter their calculations.
The accused goes to trial. At trial, the prosecution has to prove the killing. Then the accused has to present his case of self-defense.
Under the Florida law, all that changes. The police have to find enough evidence to be sure, by probable cause, that self-defense was NOT in play before they can even detain the shooter for questioning.