Results 73 to 84 of 432
Thread: George Zimmerman Trial
-
07-02-2013, 04:24 PM #73Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 4,553
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
I always assumed he was on his back, though I admit I haven't seen any verbatim statements on the matter.
If he got up, even to a crouching position, then I think his self-defense claim becomes extremely weak to non-existent (unless he could argue they were both grabbing/holding the gun, which I don't think he has claimed).
If he was able to "get away" in any manner, then he legally has to do that before using deadly force.
-
07-02-2013, 04:30 PM #74Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Houston, TX Y'all
- Posts
- 34,414
-
07-02-2013, 04:30 PM #75
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Master of 'Gifs for dummies'
"The world called for wetwork, and we answered. No greater good. No just cause." - Kazuhira Miller
-
07-02-2013, 04:40 PM #76Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Houston, TX Y'all
- Posts
- 34,414
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
At the 10:00 minute mark, Zimmerman explains the details that night to police.
He was down, screaming for help with Trayvon on top of him when Trayvon sees the gun in the holster and goes for it.
-
-
07-02-2013, 05:12 PM #78Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 4,553
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
You are right, he doesn't have a legal duty to retreat or flee, but he does have a legal duty to "reasonably believe deadly force is necessary to prevent great bodily harm or death."
The ability to move/dodge/escape absolutely raises the hurdle on what is required to "reasonably believe" you are in danger of great bodily harm. At least in the case where the other guy is unarmed.
If the fight was a standing fight, his injuries do not even get in the ballpark of making such a fear "reasonable," imo. You cannot get in a fight and after the first punch, pull out a gun and shoot someone, even under Stand Your Ground; at least not how I read the law. Nor do I think you can get in a fight, get pinned and beaten for a bit, then when the other guy let's you up, you stand up and shoot him.
EDIT: Of course searching the vast number of cases (and the results) in which Stand Your Ground was used as a defense, makes me wonder if there is really any consistent application at all with the law. It appears to be interpreted in the craziest and inconsistent of ways (both in terms of convictions and acquittals) depending on the circumstances/jury, based on some of the case summaries I am seeing.Last edited by Haloti92; 07-02-2013 at 05:17 PM.
-
-
07-02-2013, 05:28 PM #80Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 4,553
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
If that is the case than I would say the law is not being followed at all. The text of the law (for Florida) is:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/.../0776.013.html
Where, in this case (not in dwelling, residence, or vehicle) Section (3) applies:
Originally Posted by link
But HR is correct, I was wrong. There is no legal duty to flee in this case.Last edited by Haloti92; 07-02-2013 at 05:34 PM.
-
-
07-02-2013, 05:37 PM #82Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Houston, TX Y'all
- Posts
- 34,414
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Except that he wasn't punched in the face once and that was that.
-
07-02-2013, 05:51 PM #83Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 4,553
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
How many blows satisfies the law? And how much force per blow?
My point is that there is a condition that needs to be satisfied that is greater than "I was hit."
That condition is measured in "reasonable fear" of "great" bodily harm. To me, the "reasonableness" of such a fear is predicated on how much damage has been sustained, how much damage can be done per blow, how possible it is to avoid such future damage.
If standing, the odds of avoiding such future damage are not close to zero like they are when pinned down. If standing, the odds of a blow being as damaging as skull to pavement are miniscule (assuming no weapon, knife, gun, lead pipe, etc., for the other guy). Which brings us back to category one. This is the category that has to "pick up the slack" in the "reasonable fear" department once the fight is one where everyone is standing. I don't think getting a broken nose and some minor cuts is much different at all than a single punch (which can break a nose or do worse actually).
-
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
BUt reasonable fear and great bodil harm are two different things. ONe is past tense the other is in the future.
Just because the bodily harm I've may have sustained up to the point I shot someone was not life-threatening doesn't mean there is not justified fear he isn't going to keep coming at me, even if standing.
Bookmarks