Don't think this is how the "stand your ground law" works

[Links2k]

At this point, he has to rely on the "justice" system to function properly.

That's the best reason to make sounds decisions when carrying. I wake up in cold sweats thinking about getting real "justice" in our system. I have always been prepared to take a azz whipping before killing someone. I'm in my mid fortys now, but as I age there will be a time when I won't take that beating before I shoot.

After Zimmerman initiated the confrontation. He should have taken his butt kicking from that 120lb boy and gone back on "patrol".

[mikegideon]

After Zimmerman initiated the confrontation. He should have taken his butt kicking from that 120lb boy and gone back on "patrol".

There are two stories about who initiated the physical confrontation. Actually, only one that's not speculation. You may be right about taking the beating, unless "A reasonable person would be...".

[Links2k]

I can't find the Florida statute, but here is the Tennessee statute which lays out our "stand your ground" principle. Note especially item C. Should a case go to trial, this is where the jury comes into play. Should Zimmeran be charged and face a trial, he (assuming the Florida statute is similar to ours) will have to prove to a jury that there was a reasonable basis for his fear. My gut feeling is that he will eventually be arrested simply because of the political pressure now being focused on the case. If I'm right, I hope he can afford a very good attorney.

(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where such person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force against another person when and to the degree the person reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where such person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury if:

(A) The person has a reasonable belief that there is an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury;

(B)The danger creating the belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury is real, or honestly believed to be real at the time; and

© The belief of danger is founded upon reasonable grounds.

According to the "doctored" 911 tapes Zimmerman placed himself in the kids space. Had Zimmerman stayed in the Fifemobile this may not had happened.

[Links2k]

Somebody needs to be fired for the 3 day thing, unless there was no way to identify him.

The cops had his phone. The parents were calling the phone. I am almost certain that any service provider would have cooperated with law enforcement in a murder investigation to unlock the phone and notify family members.

[Guest profgunner]

Reasonable= juror

Agreed. I've served on juries and was once elected chairman of a jury. A concensus on what is "reasonable" will depend on the chance makeup of the jury AND the skill with which the arguments are made by the prosecution and defense. If you are a defendent you have no control as to who sits on the jury (unless you are a member of the Gamino crime syndicate) but you can spend $200,000 on a first-rate attorney. Unless, of course, you don't have the cash.

[mikegideon]

According to the "doctored" 911 tapes Zimmerman placed himself in the kids space. Had Zimmerman stayed in the Fifemobile this may not had happened.

Definately would not have happened. If cool heads would have prevailed... It ain't legal to whip somebody's ass either, even if they're in your space.

[mikegideon]

The cops had his phone. The parents were calling the phone. I am almost certain that any service provider would have cooperated with law enforcement in a murder investigation to unlock the phone and notify family members.

Then, they need to clean house. Unacceptable.

[mikegideon]

Agreed. I've served on juries and was once elected chairman of a jury. A concensus on what is "reasonable" will depend on the chance makeup of the jury AND the skill with which the arguments are made by the prosecution and defense. If you are a defendent you have no control as to who sits on the jury (unless you are a member of the Gamino crime syndicate) but you can spend $200,000 on a first-rate attorney. Unless, of course, you don't have the cash.

Yeah. They tried to stick me on a jury for a murder trial in Nashville. The defense kicked me out when they found out I owned the same caliber as the shooter . Wound up with an old lady in a neck brace. I was outa there in three hours

[QuietDan]

People are pissed because the boy was in the morgue for three days without his parents being notified . . .

This doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

According to his Daddy, he was just down the road at a convenience store getting an iced tea and some Skittles on the way back to Daddy's girlfriend's home. So he's late coming back because he's dead, and Daddy doesn't ask after him? Daddy doesn't know he's dead and in the morgue for three days?

Am I getting something wrong here??!! Someone explain this to me. It doesn't pass the smell test.

Edited March 25, 2012 by QuietDan

[Links2k]

Then, they need to clean house. Unacceptable.

That was the family attorneys reason for notifying the media. According to the family had the cops notified them in a timely manner and given the appearance that they were going to investigate Zimmerman they would not have called the news and we would all be doing our normal Obama bashing.

[Links2k]

This doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

According to his Daddy, he was just down the road at a convenience store getting an iced tea and some Skittles on the way back to Daddy's girlfriend's home. So he's late coming back because he's dead, and Daddy doesn't ask after him? Daddy doesn't know he's dead and in the morgue for three days?

Am I getting something wrong here??!! Someone explain this to me. It doesn't pass the smell test.

None of it passes the smell test and we are all chosing sides based on our own emotions and experiences.

[mikegideon]

My side is for the real evidence, instead of the race baiting media circus. CNN can't report a dognapping without spinning into something it's not.

Edited March 25, 2012 by mikegideon

[Guest profgunner]

None of it passes the smell test and we are all chosing sides based on our own emotions and experiences.

For the most part I agree with you. I do believe it is important to discuss this issue but we really do not have the facts. And the same applies to those participating in the "thousand hoody marches". Has anybody heard whether Zimmerman is going to give a statement through his attorney?

[Links2k]

Yeah. They tried to stick me on a jury for a murder trial in Nashville. The defense kicked me out when they found out I owned the same caliber as the shooter . Wound up with an old lady in a neck brace. I was outa there in three hours

I had the same thing happen to me. Neither side wanted me because I was a gun owner with a prior law enforcement/corrections background. I guess that it did not matter that it was twenty years ago. I really wanted to be on that jury to hear the facts because the suspect seemed like a real bad boy. Seems like the judge dismissed everyone who stated that they owned guns.

[mikegideon]

This doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

According to his Daddy, he was just down the road at a convenience store getting an iced tea and some Skittles on the way back to Daddy's girlfriend's home. So he's late coming back because he's dead, and Daddy doesn't ask after him? Daddy doesn't know he's dead and in the morgue for three days?

Am I getting something wrong here??!! Someone explain this to me. It doesn't pass the smell test.

Where's my Skittles? You would think they would wanna know. Saw a headline yesterday where the family is gonna sue. Does that help your smeller?

Edited March 25, 2012 by mikegideon

[Links2k]

For the most part I agree with you. I do believe it is important to discuss this issue but we really do not have the facts. And the same applies to those participating in the "thousand hoody marches". Has anybody heard whether Zimmerman is going to give a statement through his attorney?

Sharpton and Jackson have no power. They find out where there will be cameras. They show up and take credit for organizing. They get their power/money from the media not the people. That's why MSNBC gave Sharpton a job and you never hear from Jackson until someone makes up a crisis. They have no support.

[mikegideon]

For the most part I agree with you. I do believe it is important to discuss this issue but we really do not have the facts. And the same applies to those participating in the "thousand hoody marches". Has anybody heard whether Zimmerman is going to give a statement through his attorney?

Welcome to TGO, prof. We always figure it out before it goes to trial

[Links2k]

Where's my Skittles? You would think they would wanna know. Saw a headline yesterday where the family is gonna sue. Does that help your smeller?

In our society sueing is the natural progression of things.

[Links2k]

Welcome to TGO, prof. We always figure it out before it goes to trial

This is like the front porch of the general store.

[RobertNashville]

Wow...I can't believe that on a stunningly beautiful Sunday afternoon so many people are here, pretty much saying the same thing over an over again.

I'm going out and shoot some'thin!.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

That said, Zimmerman may still have a problem on his hands because it's going to take some pretty compelling evidence to use deadly force against an unarmed aggressor. Deadly force can only be used to meet deadly force and there are very few circumstances where someone using their fists would qualify as a threat of deadly force. As far as the "stand your ground" law, all it does is remove the duty to retreat in the face of a threat, it doesn't change the rules for self-defense as it relates to appropriate levels of force.

We're talking about a fit, football playing, 6 foot plus male reportedly sitting on the chest of a man who's down, pounding on his face. If it were me, I would be afraid of significant bodily harm and be in fear of my life and I would shoot.

I can imagine a hulking 6 foot plus boyfriend beating a 100 pound, five foot tall woman with his fists, and if I was on a Grand Jury I would no-bill the woman if she shot him.

I was asked by this nitwit fellow worker if he got mad at me in a scenario like cutting him off at an intersection and he got mad, cornered me somewhere down the road and made the attempt to "whip my ass", my response was "I would probably shoot you". The nitwit weighs 300 lbs and is 30 years my junior, plus the "whip my ass" scenario is likely with the maturity level of the kid. If approached like that, my options would certainly be limited.

I've never liked fisticuffs. Always considered it rude uncivilized behavior. I poorly understand it and may be incorrectly recalling the past. In the 1950's thru the mid-1970's (maybe it was about the same before the 1950's but I wasn't there to witness)-- I recall unarmed fist-fights, especially between below-30 age dudes-- Fights were not daily or weekly occurrences but neither were they rare. I don't recall many fights ending so bad that it put somebody in the hospital though they could mess up noses, teeth and ears, leave unsightly black eyes. I don't recall police routinely called in the event of fist fights. I don't recall police especially interested in investigating such "trivial" events of fights between young men, unless there was also robbery, or weapons were involved, or one guy was "ganged up on".

The culture is violent enough nowadays, but it was violent back then as well. But not typically to the point of "I'm gonna put you in the hospital" violent. If that makes any sense. It seemed more a "hobby" than "pro" violence for purpose of robbery or whatever. Am not trying to paint it with rose-colored glasses as some sort of "good old days" because I didn't like it any better then than now,

Wondered if the movies influenced culture back then, or if culture determined the movies popular enough to be profitable. John Wayne movies were popular and the majority of John Wayne movies had rootin-tootin riot scenes with dozens of he-men wailing on each other. The riot-fight scenes were usually shot as comic-relief episodes-- Portrayed as a well-known fact that real men occasionally enjoy a good fight, busting up the joint and losing some teeth. Make up afterwards and be the best of friends.

Saw some pretty bad fights in high school but don't recall the police getting involved, though suspensions and paddlings were handed out. Big paddles wielded by muscular gym teachers.

Wasn't defenseless, played tackle in a AAA champ football team. Didn't like fights on principle, also was strong but slow. Fast wiry dudes could inflict some damage afore I could get ahold of em. Once I got ahold of em things would work out better on my behalf. But generally was happy with my nose and teeth in un-modified form. Senior year high school, my dinky rock band played a gig in Macon. We were not aware at the time that Macon of that era was full of tush hogs. A rough town. Anyway, 2 am at the gas station leaving town, a carload of local good'ol'boys had to have an old-fashioned john wayne shindig before we could drive back home.

Couple of times when I was going to college in Atlanta, I'd be walking down Peachtree at night and drunk guys my age would come up and start a fight just for the fun of it. One time was riding the bus from hotlanta to chatt and got layed-over saturday night at the Rome Ga bus station. My hair was over the collar but hadn't got long enough for a ponytail. Had to sit there for a couple of hours. Was about the only guy there. This bullet-headed drunk ditch digger standing out on the sidewalk calling to me to come out so he could kick my ass. The downtown policeman told the guy a couple of times, "Now Lem, you know you can't go in there and kick that hippy's ass." But the cop made no effort to arrest the drunk redneck merely for trying to start a fight.

As time went on the fighting began to be viewed as more deviant and less fashionable. Random fights "just for the fun of it" seemed to subside thru the 1970's and into the 1990's. Dunno if drugs had anything to do with the culture shift, but young rednecks got less interested in picking fights about the same time they started smoking pot. On the other hand gang bangers smoke pot and therefore pot probably had nothing to do with it. Was just an interesting coincidence at the time. I can't stand the stuff, am stupid enough already.

Anyway apologies rambling. Dunno nothin. Am pretty sure that back in the old days the authorities would have put a young man in jail for shooting another young man for the "trivial" reason of merely getting his butt kicked fair-and-square. But they would also have put a young man in jail for "taking it too far" and putting another young man in the hospital or morgue with his bare hands. Did zimmerman get beat up bad enough to be hospitalized?

On the other hand if a young fit man got shot beating on a woman or an old fart, then were I on a jury, would be inclined to vote not guilty unless the woman or old fart were truly a threat to the young man.

I thought blacks found lynch mobs to be offensive. Is that only when the lynch mob is not black?

As far as Jackson and Sharpton, they should shut up unless they are going to hold a rally everytime a black kid kills another black kid.

It is a shame, but all races can get butt-hurt over this kind of stuff. If a white man is rude to me, or tries to cheat me, or picks a fight, then I know that it is because the guy is an a-hole. But if that a-hole white man acts the same to a red, brown, yellow or black man, then it is natural for the victim to assume racism rather than the occams razor explanation that a-holes come in all colors. I'm not claiming any moral superiority. If I was treated badly by a non-white, then I would also be tempted to suspect racism rather than merely bad luck of encountering an a-hole who coincidentally also happened to be non-white.

That posted LA Times article which seemed "going a little easy" on zimmerman. At least they weren't selling him down the river for racism. Lots of hispanics live in LA. Maybe I'm too cynical, but if zimmerman gets treated too raw, then it wouldn't be surprising to see hispanics butt-hurt that the guy is getting railroaded because of ethnicity.

Similarly, that ongoing Dooley case, where the ancient black man shoots a young white man after a scuffle on the ground-- If they give Dooley too hard a time in court then I could see Sharpton, Jackson and panthers getting all butt-hurt over that case. It wouldn't be inconceivable to find Sharpton demanding conviction in one scuffle case where the black man got shot, and then after a commercial break Sharpton might come back demanding acquittal in a scuffle case where the black man was the shooter. That would be surreal, but if the Dooley case gets more coverage, would not be impossible.

Edited March 25, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[K191145]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/TheLaw/fist-fight-left-miami-tourist-dead-caught-video/story?id=11445914

I don't think i'm going to allow anyone to just woop my ass, there's always a potential he could kill you.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It's convenient that we can discount one witness statement but totally accept another as truth. Its all suspect or none of it is.

I also disagree with absolutes suggesting this was either a justified shoot or there is just some giant conspiracy. The police couldn't make an arrest on scene due to the SYG law and the statement they got from the shooter. If Martin was still alive and made a statement to police that Zimmerman attacked him then he probably would be arrested. Since then the PD did their investigation and handed it off to the DA. Maybe Zimmerman was days away from being arrested when this went national. We don't know that yet.

Either way, I would agree at this point it'll be hard to get a fair trial, but then again folks have said that before and they were still able to find jurors that gave a verdict based on evidence alone or lack of evidence (Casey Anthony).

Just because the media hype and the involvement of Jesse Jackson doesn't mean something bad didn't happen. I don't trust the media either, but I didn't suspect the shooter of wrongdoing until I heard the 911 tape. All other witness accounts can be countered by other witness accounts, but Zimmerman's words are his own and that should be enough for a Grand Jury to look into it.

Look in the mirror. Evidence is evidence. I haven't decided anything, but you have, it seems.

Why don't you admit that there may be much more to this than you or I know? Witness credibility

will decide this case and possibly some forensic evidence.

I have no idea what will happen, but it is too driven by the media.

[daddyo]

Wow...I can't believe that on a stunningly beautiful Sunday afternoon so many people are here, pretty much saying the same thing over an over again.

I'm going out and shoot some'thin!.

Okay....

[Mr. Brooks]