So you are saying she can’t actually prove a criminal charge, but she is going to try to snow the judge and jury?
No, it doesn’t. But deadly force is allowed in response to actions that cause reasonable fear for life or great bodily harm. And that’s good law.
But immunity from prosecution removes the process to determine if the claim for fear of life or great bodily harm is justified. That is why it is bad law. Any time we have to just take the suspect’s word for his innocence, it is bad law.
That’s not the claim. The claim is that the prosecutor may think it’s a difficult call, something on the margin, and not have a great deal of confidence that a jury will agree with the prosecution’s assessment of the case. My guess is that Angela Corey is in that position now in deciding what (if any) charges should be leveled against George Zimmerman. I don’t want prosecutors to only make charges in cases that are an absolute clear-cut slam dunk, but YMMV.
But you don’t just take the suspect’s word for his innocence. You also take forensic evidence and witnesses’ testimony.
The law has been on the books since 2005. You need to post actual cases and skip the hypotheticals. The link I posted mentioned 140 cases where SYG was invoked. Maybe you should find something that is reality based that matches your scenario.
NBC is now reporting that George Zimmerman has been taken into custody, in advance of the press conference which is scheduled in about half an hour.
That wasn’t what Bricker was asking. He used the term preponderance of evidence. That is the civil standard. Not beyond a reasonable doubt which is a criminal standard. Actually Alan Dershowitz was talking about this topic yesterday.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/10/opinion/dershowitz-trayvon-prosecutor-nightmare/?hpt=hp_t1
relief that the world has gone back to making sense
But neither “preponderance of evidence” nor “beyond reasonable doubt” are absolute terms. One person’s preponderance is perhaps another person’s beyond doubt. I think it’s arguable that the public is well served by putting marginal cases to juries to make a such a call.
But… I will stop commenting on Bricker’s statements, as he is far more capable of explaining or defending them than I am.
AP is reporting that Zimmerman is going to be charged with 2nd degree murder. My non-lawerly understanding is that this would indicated a deliberate unjustified killing. Perhaps it’s somewhat different in Florida. If the reporting is correct, it also suggests (to me) that the prosecutor has pretty much entirely dismissed Zimmerman’s version of the event (what we know of it, that is).
Ooh, I’m excited as a school girl going to the prom! 
I think this is an unrealistic standard. It requires someone under attack, and who has just been punched to evaluate his danger in real time, while continuing to be attacked. To use the example of this case, is Zimmerman supposed to sit there and say, ok he’s punched me and start counting the times Martin slams his head into the ground? 1… 2… 3… ok, now I can use leathal force! No. It’s a unrealistic standard. If someone is being assaulted, they are the victim, and I am going to give them broad latitude to defend themselves.
If they use disproportionate force, well, then they made a mistake. But they didn’t create the situation. The person that assaulted them did. So I’m perfectly comfortable with these outcomes. If you punch someone and they shoot you in self-defense, all I have to say to you is “don’t punch people”.
shrug People die from punches. And how am I supposed to know you are going to be happy just punching me once, and won’t end up stomping my head into the ground? It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and judge. But when you are the one in the fight, you aren’t thinking very clearly. My opinion is that we should give these victims the benefit of the doubt.
Here is 2nd degree murder in Florida:
Unless some fantastic new fact comes to life, she doesn’t have a prayer proving that Zimmerman had a “depraved mind regardless of human life”.
Ok, what I’ve found about the definition of 2nd degree murder in Florida:
“The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life…”
MSNBC’s “Hardball” just interviewed a former US Attorney, Zachary Carter, who seems to disagree with you. He says SYG does not protect a person who provokes the conflict; he is obliged to retreat if possible, even if he was not the first to use force.
“The justification described in the law is unavailable to a person who initially provokes the use of force against him or herself.”
I realize that we don’t know whether whatever Zimmerman did would be considered provocative enough to disqualify the SYG defense.
We only know the claims reported in the media. Corey knows a great deal more than that, and I suggest that she has a much better idea than either of us about her chances.
A number of attorneys have been quoted claiming that it’s not uncommon for prosecutors to charge “up”, to lay the most serious charges possible as a way of applying leverage to get a plea arrangement to a lesser charge. We will see if it has any applicability to this case.
Shrug It just gives the impression of a political decision to me. Like I said, I’m leaving room for facts I don’t know, but there’s no way with what we know that Zimmerman is guilty of 2nd degree murder. If that is the charge in front of a judge, it should be dismissed.
If you’re still so confused about why Zimmerman wasn’t immediately arrested I don’t know how recent events materially change your confusion.
What I don’t get is lots of people in this thread showed a deep misunderstanding of concepts like probable cause, self-defense and et cetera and as I predicted any charge will just be used as “ex post facto” justification of prior arguments.
The inarguable truth remains: based on what we knew in the early days of this incident there was no publicly known information that would have justified an arrest. Further, given the special prosecutor had to pore over lots of evidence that wasn’t even available or processed by police on the early days of the incident calls into question how easy a call it would have been at that time, either.
I have to hope at least you can concede Angela Corey based her decision to prosecute on a lot more than the scant information we had on this case when you started this thread.
I think Angela Corey did an excellent job with the press conference.
Here is the relevant definition (according to the FSU law school) of the elements of 2nd degree murder, including the “depraved mind” part:
It seems the most different element to prove would be the second, and I think Zimmerman’s comments during the 911 call might be key to that.