Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New York Magazine)   Prosecutor confirms Zimmerman will be charged in the Trayvon Martin shooting, assuming they can find the guy   (nymag.com) divider line 2460
    More: News, prosecutors, Florida law  
•       •       •

14646 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Apr 2012 at 3:00 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



2460 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | » | Last
 
2012-04-11 07:42:50 PM  

eraser8: doglover: eraser8: How dumb do you have to be to repeat the "middle of the night" lie?

Martin was killed at 7:25 PM.


You'd almost think I was on another continent or something when this all went down.

So, your location prevented you from finding out that the killing occurred just after sunset? Your location certainly didn't stop you from saying stupid shiat that just happened to be prejudicial to Martin.


My apathy prevented me from looking up each individual detail of a story THAT WAS BEING INVESTIGATED BY THE POLICE. Zimmerman shot Treyvon, and has been in contact with the police the whole time. He's facing murder 2 and in custody after kicking his celebrity ambulance chasing "pro-boner" attorney to the curb.

The only things I'm saying are against the lynch mob that is surrounding this case. You people are acting like animals. Zimmerman isn't some guy who went around gunning down little kids from his car trunk with a sniper rifle and running away like the DC shooter. He turned himself in moments after the shooting when police arrived and so far all of his side of the story is collaborated by the evidence put forth in the news.

Maybe it was a murder of the second degree by a wannabe Wyatt Earp with a penchant for "coon hunting" as he liked to call it. Maybe it was a justified shooting by a good man instigated by a gangsta rap inspired troubled yoot who liked to mix it up with the honkeys. Either way it was being handled by the police and is currently going straight to court.

That doesn't mean insane statements like "Having his head bashed against the ground wasn't REALLY a threat to his life." make sense. I don't care if it's noon and you're in front of a pre-school and your kids are watching, if someone you don't know hits your head against pavement in an unexpected fight, you're ready to use whatever weapon you've got on hand.
 
2012-04-11 07:43:45 PM  

Sticky Hands: Mike Chewbacca: gameshowhost: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Zimmermang

Don't know if on purpose or typo, but I'm still laughing.

It's intentional. He's trying to turn it into a "thing" even though it's horribly racist and Hispanics don't even say "man" like that.

I actually know a few that type and "man" that way. wouldn't be a thing if someone didn't do it.

besides, I have been informed by my betters that we are what society says we are, so Zimmerman and the rest of us are now white.

make with the privilege farkers.


SB1070 is no longer racist! Enjoy!
 
2012-04-11 07:44:17 PM  

SubBass49: Why not a Hispanic section? Zimmerman is Hispanic.

Whites have drafted him in the late rounds of the racial draft..


Pretty sure he hit the waiver wire about a month ago.
 
2012-04-11 07:44:29 PM  
He is soooooooooooo screwd.
 
2012-04-11 07:46:39 PM  

MagSeven: I've favorited four farkers as the "Racist Fantastic Four".
/It's race-baitin' time!


I have you favorited as "Token FWC black guy"

/not racist., I swear.
//Favoriting you as Virgil was worse.
 
2012-04-11 07:46:47 PM  

stuffy: He is soooooooooooo screwd.


"n****s wanna do him in the ass just to pay his ass back so they standin' in line..."

/too obscure?
 
2012-04-11 07:46:51 PM  

SubBass49: bugontherug: 9beers: bugontherug: since it appears to exculpate from all liability an aggressor who assaults someone, and then kills him when the victim defends himself.

Except that it doesn't.

Some people have been quoting language to the effect that even if Zimmerman started the fight, he had the right to kill Trayvon if during the course of the fight Zimmerman came to believe deadly force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. Viewing the text of the statute, I can't find that language. Maybe it doesn't exist after all.

Imagine the flood gates such a ruling would open...


Gang Member: Well, officer, he was gonna kill me...I had to shoot him.

Officer: You followed him for 3 blocks in your car while he rode his bike away from you. You jumped out of your car and tackled him, then proceeded to engage in mutual combat. He got the upper hand after a few minutes, so you shot & killed him.

Gang Member: Yes, sir.

Officer: Sounds completely logical...let me undo your handcuffs.


Don't forget to call the police, first, Mr. Gang Member.
 
2012-04-11 07:47:34 PM  
White Supremacists BEFORE Zimmerman was charged: "You people don't respect the rule of law! You're trying to lynch an innocent man! The AG didn't charge him, so therefore he's obviously 100% innocent!"
White Supremacists NOW: "The law is corrupt! This only happened because the Media made a big deal out of it! I hope you're happy now, Libruls!"
 
2012-04-11 07:47:54 PM  

itazurakko: Mike Chewbacca: Were the voice analyses of the cries for help debunked? Meaning, two different people said the voice crying for help wasn't George Zimmerman. Has that been debunked? If not, that's a huge hole in GZ's defense.

I haven't followed these threads in a while but I'm wondering that same thing too - back last week or earlier someone said that Travyon Martin's parents even said the screaming was not their kid, but I never found a legitimate report of it one way or the other. So I'm still curious.

Anyway, this is good news - let's have a trial.


Link (new window)

Check the video at 2:57 through the end of the video.
 
2012-04-11 07:50:14 PM  

P-Money All $tar: MagSeven: I've favorited four farkers as the "Racist Fantastic Four".
/It's race-baitin' time!

I have you favorited as "Token FWC black guy"

/not racist., I swear.
//Favoriting you as Virgil was worse.


Yes. Virgil would have been unforgivable :)
 
2012-04-11 07:50:22 PM  
At this point in the thread, it is highly unlikely that I'll read your post if it does not have a picture in it.

i1083.photobucket.com
 
2012-04-11 07:50:25 PM  

Mavent: White Supremacists BEFORE Zimmerman was charged: "You people don't respect the rule of law! You're trying to lynch an innocent man! The AG didn't charge him, so therefore he's obviously 100% innocent!"
White Supremacists NOW: "The law is corrupt! This only happened because the Media made a big deal out of it! I hope you're happy now, Libruls!"


White supremacists before AND after he was charged: A bunch of mouth-breathing knuckle-dragging retards so mentally deficient that they'd probably choke to death on their own drool if they didn't let it drip from their slack jaws every few minutes.
 
2012-04-11 07:50:25 PM  

s2s2s2: cretinbob: because he got out of his car.

Which is not stalking.
herp.


stalking (new window)

intransitive verb
1
: to pursue quarry or prey stealthily
2
: to walk stiffly or haughtily

A vocabulary, you should get one
 
2012-04-11 07:50:34 PM  

stuffy: He is soooooooooooo screwd.



He may as well just turn himself in to the New Black Panthers.

Or commit suicide.

Either way he's pink slime.
 
2012-04-11 07:51:29 PM  

Mavent: White Supremacists BEFORE Zimmerman was charged: "You people don't respect the rule of law! You're trying to lynch an innocent man! The AG didn't charge him, so therefore he's obviously 100% innocent!"
White Supremacists NOW: "The law is corrupt! This only happened because the Media made a big deal out of it! I hope you're happy now, Libruls!"


Out of curiosity, are you religious?
 
2012-04-11 07:51:34 PM  

SubBass49: ou followed him for 3 blocks in your car while he rode his bike away from you. You jumped out of your car and tackled him,


If it turns out there is any evidence that Zimmerman tackled Trayvon, I expect your example would then be relevant.
 
2012-04-11 07:52:15 PM  

cretinbob: s2s2s2: cretinbob: because he got out of his car.

Which is not stalking.
herp.

stalking (new window)

intransitive verb
1
: to pursue quarry or prey stealthily
2
: to walk stiffly or haughtily

A vocabulary, you should get one


I assumed he was referring to the legal definition
 
2012-04-11 07:52:30 PM  

ChuDogg: madgonad: However, I don't see an affirmative defense being successful without the defendant testifying. There isn't a good witness that can make his case for him.

Link (new window)


I don't think that will help. Proving he was losing a fight (because he was a pussy) isn't going to help. Especially if he started the fight. Other evidence of him stalking the victim will hurt him too. What Zimmerman needs is evidence that Martin attacked him unprovoked. He also needs some evidence of injury. Something to show that he was in fear for his life or grievous bodily harm. The bag of Skittles and soda aren't too scary.
 
2012-04-11 07:53:40 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Mavent: White Supremacists BEFORE Zimmerman was charged: "You people don't respect the rule of law! You're trying to lynch an innocent man! The AG didn't charge him, so therefore he's obviously 100% innocent!"
White Supremacists NOW: "The law is corrupt! This only happened because the Media made a big deal out of it! I hope you're happy now, Libruls!"

Out of curiosity, are you religious?


Not in the slightest. However, I do find it interesting that the Party of Jesus was so quick to rush to the defense of George Zimmerman.
 
2012-04-11 07:54:13 PM  
Corey: 'We do not prosecute by public pressure or by petition'...

except, she just did.
 
2012-04-11 07:54:33 PM  

9beers: vegasj: Is this dude in the yellow tie making his own words up?

LOL yes.


skeptisys.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-04-11 07:55:35 PM  

cretinbob: s2s2s2: cretinbob: because he got out of his car.

Which is not stalking.
herp.

stalking (new window)

intransitive verb
1
: to pursue quarry or prey stealthily
2
: to walk stiffly or haughtily

A vocabulary, you should get one


So he was walking stiffly? Because apparently, you misread #1.
 
2012-04-11 07:56:00 PM  

Mavent: White Supremacists NOW: "The law is corrupt! This only happened because the Media made a big deal out of it! I hope you're happy now, Libruls!"


I know I'm going to regret asking this. Sort of like when you strike up a conversation with the weird hobo talking to himself at the busstop. But.....

Is there even one person in here who said anything close to that?
 
2012-04-11 07:56:20 PM  

Contrabulous Flabtraption: So when America splits in two after the racial war that will stem from Zimmerman's inevitable acquittal, which states will whites take and which states will blacks take?


http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/politics/election-outcome.jpg
 
2012-04-11 07:57:05 PM  

SlothB77: Corey: 'We do not prosecute by public pressure or by petition'...

except, she just did.



True dat.

TRUE DAT!
 
2012-04-11 07:57:06 PM  

cretinbob: Contrabulous Flabtraption: So when America splits in two after the racial war that will stem from Zimmerman's inevitable acquittal, which states will whites take and which states will blacks take?

www.vaughns-1-pagers.com

 
2012-04-11 07:57:15 PM  
These threads have just been going around in circles for the last week, with people repeating things that have been debunked countless times, the same trolls saying the same things with people responding to them in earnest, and about 20 people I've added to my favorites list (note: I don't favorite people I like. I use it to tag racists and assholes).
 
2012-04-11 07:57:24 PM  
The thread is moving fast, but I hope Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom sees this:

Dow, you've usually been a voice of reason in these threads, that much I acknowledge even if we don't agree. So I'm gonna leave all the hyperbole aside for a second and ask you a straight-up question: Do you think that the media is responsible for Zimmerman being charged? No, I'm not trying to set you up. :) I just want to know what you think, as I've admired your restraint through all this.
 
2012-04-11 07:58:26 PM  
My last post, but if anybody wants to see how hard it will be for a murder one conviction, consider the following.

i39.tinypic.com

Police found a single shell casing at the scene, and when they seized George Zimmerman's handgun, a Kel Tel 9 mm, its magazine was full, according to a source close to the investigation. The only bullet missing was the one in the chamber, the source said.

Link (new window)

Why didn't it fully cycle? Because someone was holding onto the slide. If the gun slide doesn't slide all the way back, then the next bullet cannot be pushed into place by the magazine spring.

If this is true, it shows a scuffle over the gun. The prosecution can claim that Zimmerman chased Martin, confronted Martin, initiated contact with Martin, drag audio analysts to say it he said "coons" or even that it was Martin screaming, or everything else that has been alleged by the lawyer and the media, but if Zimmerman can show that Martin had grabbed his gun at the time of the conflict and he had no choice but to shoot, he couldn't fall under the "demonstrating a depraved mind" at the scene to qualify for a murder charge.
 
2012-04-11 07:59:23 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Mavent: White Supremacists NOW: "The law is corrupt! This only happened because the Media made a big deal out of it! I hope you're happy now, Libruls!"

I know I'm going to regret asking this. Sort of like when you strike up a conversation with the weird hobo talking to himself at the busstop. But.....

Is there even one person in here who said anything close to that?


Every once in a while Mavent posts some of his fanfiction in various random threads. This is one of those times.
 
2012-04-11 07:59:35 PM  
"We did not come to this decision lightly," Corey emphasized. "We do not prosecute by public pressure or petition."

Ok, so let me get this straight. He shot and killed a guy in "self defense". The local police and states attorney wouldn't charge him because of the "stand your ground" law, and lack of real evidence to support a murder charge. That was fine, nobody in the Federal government really cared. Then all the "adders on " celebs jumped on the bandwagon, to get their name and face back in the news, and screamed "THIS IS A OUTRAGE" And suddenly, you care enough, and have enough evidence to arrest him and charge him with murder, but only because people are raising a stink, and you have been told to "take care of this" by your bosses.

So ya..even though i believe the guy killed him in cold blood, it looks EXACTLY as if you are bowing to public pressure.
 
2012-04-11 08:00:20 PM  

redmid17: Link (new window)

Check the video at 2:57 through the end of the video.


Thanks.
 
2012-04-11 08:00:30 PM  

rfronk: At this point in the thread, it is highly unlikely that I'll read your post if it does not have a picture in it.

[i1083.photobucket.com image 360x450]


Fine. I'll start posting pics of attractive young people in every comment.

www.colourbox.com
 
2012-04-11 08:00:30 PM  
Maybe I'm naive but I would think the federal prosecutor wouldn't be pressing charges if she didn't think there was a decent case against zimmerman -and- that he was actually guilty/full of shiat, so I'm surprised how many people think they have more knowledge of the case than the state, oh wait this is fark.

Also, I still haven't seen any real pictures of zimmermans head bashed in, and even if he was getting his arse kicked, he can't claim self-defense if he's losing a fight that he started.
 
2012-04-11 08:00:46 PM  

cretinbob: Contrabulous Flabtraption: So when America splits in two after the racial war that will stem from Zimmerman's inevitable acquittal, which states will whites take and which states will blacks take?

http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/politics/election-outcome.jpg



If you're going to have a civil war, it helps if it's a race war.

That way no one has to shell out cash for uniforms.
 
2012-04-11 08:01:28 PM  

SubBass49: White supremacists before AND after he was charged: A bunch of mouth-breathing knuckle-dragging retards so mentally deficient that they'd probably choke to death on their own drool if they didn't let it drip from their slack jaws every few minutes. meh, one less spic on the streets


Fixed for reality.
 
2012-04-11 08:01:50 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Every once in a while Mavent posts some of his fanfiction in various random threads. This is one of those times.


Right, because Thunderpipes and Phinn are both fictional characters in the Twilight pastiche I'm writing.
 
2012-04-11 08:01:59 PM  

ChuDogg: murder one conviction


No one is asking for murder one, are they?

Second degree murder or manslaughter seem more likely to me. I haven't seen people saying this shooting was premeditated at all - guy might have been profiling, and done stuff he shouldn't have to start this situation, but I haven't seen anyone thinking that Zimmerman set out to kill someone that night.
 
2012-04-11 08:02:21 PM  

themeaningoflifeisnot: When an accused in Florida claims self-defense and there is even the slightest trial proof or inference from the trial proof that he may have acted in self-defense, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was not justified in the use of deadly force. Your repeated claims to the contrary are completely false.


From the Florida model jury instructions, it appears you are right, which I found a bit surprising:

If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty.

However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.


The model instructions also include:

Aggressor. § 776.041, Fla. Stat.
However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find:

Give only if the defendant is charged with an independent forcible felony. See Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or

Define applicable forcible felony. Define after paragraph 2 if both paragraphs 1 and 2 are given. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat.
2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless:

a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant).


b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force.


Maybe they have evidence he was the aggressor, maybe not. But based on this jury instruction, it seems the prosecution can argue that if he provoked the confrontation, possibly just be his actions of following him for several minutes, then SYG does not apply. If he provoked the use of force against him, he then, apparently, has a duty to retreat.

Not sure this makes much of a difference, because we don't have the facts they do. But I find it interesting nonetheless.
 
2012-04-11 08:02:38 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Mavent: White Supremacists NOW: "The law is corrupt! This only happened because the Media made a big deal out of it! I hope you're happy now, Libruls!"

I know I'm going to regret asking this. Sort of like when you strike up a conversation with the weird hobo talking to himself at the busstop. But.....

Is there even one person in here who said anything close to that?


Have you even READ this thread?!?

weirdmentations.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-04-11 08:03:36 PM  

Dougie AXP: NIXON YOU DOLT!!!!!: Dougie AXP: I am definitely not a lawyer, but from talking to some lawyer friends and seeing it depicted time after time after time on TV and in movies, it's been the prosecution.

It doesn't mean the defense can't ask, but I'm used to the prosecution always doing it.

The prosecution, to my understanding (IANAL) has to actually file on the lesser included charges. That was part of the screw up in the Anthony case, the jury couldn't find her guilty of a lesser charge because they weren't given a lesser charge on which to find her guilty.

I agree. Like I said, I believe, the prosecution has to submit an amendment of the charges before they rest their case. If they do, the judge can allow or disallow it. If he does, he can then instruct the jury to deliberate on the lesser offenses.

basically, we're in violent agreement with each other.


Everyone forgive me if this has been covered -- 1400 posts?-- but here's where in my opinion (criminologist, not lawyer), 2nd degree murder is the BEST possible outcome for both the prosecutor and Zimmerman. It goes like this:

1. Prosecutor charges Zimmerman with murder. There is much rejoicing amongst the angry mob with pitchforks.
2. Zimmerman goes to trial (yes, he will also probably be held in jail pending trial, but he'll almost certainly be in protective custody, and considering the fact that he couldn't show his face in public without being killed, why not make the state pay to keep him hidden rather than use his own resources?)
3. Defense goes balls-to-the-wall with a "self-defense" argument. Considering the fact that they already apparently have some witnesses who will testify that Martin was thrashing him, this is likely to get some significant traction.
4. Defense then vigorously resists any prosecution attempt to have "included offense" instructions given to the jury. Basically making the argument that Zimmerman was NOT negligent nor reckless, but intentionally, legally, shot Martin (thus should not be convicted of manslaughter). If they're successful in this effort, the jury will have to choose between sending Zimmerman away for life, or believing that he might possibly have been in fear of his life and acting legally under Florida law.
5. Jury acquits.
6. Zimmerman immediately commences legal action against Al Sharpton (and NBC, for allowing Sharpton to continue broadcasting what was will be called a vendetta against an innocent man). Zimmerman gets wealthy, moves somewhere, changes name, lives happily ever after.

Oh, and I forgot: 7. Rioting occurs. At least one legally justified homicide will result (and probably several legally unjustified ones). This will be blamed on the anonymous jury, so nobody suffers except the maimed and dead. The system continues without change. Status quo ante.
 
2012-04-11 08:03:45 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: "We did not come to this decision lightly," Corey emphasized. "We do not prosecute by public pressure or petition."

Ok, so let me get this straight. He shot and killed a guy in "self defense". The local police and states attorney wouldn't charge him because of the "stand your ground" law, and lack of real evidence to support a murder charge. That was fine, nobody in the Federal government really cared. Then all the "adders on " celebs jumped on the bandwagon, to get their name and face back in the news, and screamed "THIS IS A OUTRAGE" And suddenly, you care enough, and have enough evidence to arrest him and charge him with murder, but only because people are raising a stink, and you have been told to "take care of this" by your bosses.

So ya..even though i believe the guy killed him in cold blood, it looks EXACTLY as if you are bowing to public pressure.


Well, clearly it was chilly out.
 
2012-04-11 08:04:54 PM  

Mavent: The thread is moving fast, but I hope Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom sees this:

Dow, you've usually been a voice of reason in these threads, that much I acknowledge even if we don't agree. So I'm gonna leave all the hyperbole aside for a second and ask you a straight-up question: Do you think that the media is responsible for Zimmerman being charged? No, I'm not trying to set you up. :) I just want to know what you think, as I've admired your restraint through all this.


No, I don't think the media is responsible. I think they may have played a part in increasing the political pressure for some type of official response, but no, I don't think its fair to say that the media is at fault.

I think that the media and the accumulating political significance played a non-pivotal role but a role none the less. But to be honest, I trust that the prosecution has conducted a thorough investigation, and feels that it can try an fair case against Zimmermang.
 
2012-04-11 08:06:09 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Mavent: White Supremacists BEFORE Zimmerman was charged: "You people don't respect the rule of law! You're trying to lynch an innocent man! The AG didn't charge him, so therefore he's obviously 100% innocent!"
White Supremacists NOW: "The law is corrupt! This only happened because the Media made a big deal out of it! I hope you're happy now, Libruls!"

Out of curiosity, are you religious?


FYI, today the Special Prosecutor, and the spokesman for the family(CNN didn't identify him with a label and I missed the very start)....Anyway, both of them harped on facts and justice, and even mentioned GZ's due rights.

The funny part? A day or two ago I modified a list.

Mavent (ignored: Defend justice? THAT IS RACIST!)

Just incase you missed the last 5 or so threads of his inflamatory racism(tied with a sick race-bait / accusations).

I only resort to mentioning it, because despite of several deleted posts, he's not banned. I guess I see the allure of paying 5$ a month now.
 
2012-04-11 08:06:36 PM  

Mavent: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Every once in a while Mavent posts some of his fanfiction in various random threads. This is one of those times.

Right, because Thunderpipes and Phinn are both fictional characters in the Twilight pastiche I'm writing.


If only a person was creative and relented enough to come up with a Thunderpipes... He'd be the next James Griffin.
 
2012-04-11 08:06:41 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Every once in a while Mavent posts some of his fanfiction in various random threads. This is one of those times.


I suppose that makes Thunderpipes and Phinn figments of my imagination. Thank god.

Anyway, I HAVE asked some serious questions in these threads, but they tend to get ignored. I'm still hoping to get your insight on the extent to which, if any, you think the media forced charges to be filed, but I'll have to check after dinner, because it's time for food.
 
2012-04-11 08:07:17 PM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: themeaningoflifeisnot: When an accused in Florida claims self-defense and there is even the slightest trial proof or inference from the trial proof that he may have acted in self-defense, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was not justified in the use of deadly force. Your repeated claims to the contrary are completely false.

From the Florida model jury instructions, it appears you are right, which I found a bit surprising:

If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty.

However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.

The model instructions also include:

Aggressor. § 776.041, Fla. Stat.
However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find:

Give only if the defendant is charged with an independent forcible felony. See Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or

Define applicable forcible felony. Define after paragraph 2 if both paragraphs 1 and 2 are given. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat.
2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless:

a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant).

b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resume ...


Ooops
 
2012-04-11 08:07:19 PM  
All this shiat makes me want to play some Ace Attorney.
 
2012-04-11 08:07:40 PM  
Would everyone please read the following summary and stop trying to guess FL's laws and procedures?

http://www.husseinandwebber.com/stand_your_ground.html (new window)

"NOTE: In Gray v. State, 13 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009), the Fifth District Court of Appeal of Florida (governing Sanford, Florida, the site of the Trayvon Martin shooting) adopted the procedures outlined above in Petersen, holding that the right to immunity from criminal prosecution afforded by Section 776.032 is to be determined by the trial court after an evidentiary proceeding in which the criminal defendant has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. at 114."

Presuming that this goes to trial and Z's camp invokes Stand Your Ground as an affirmative defense -- there is the phase where Z must display (a temporarily-shifted burden), by a preponderance of the evidence, such claimed immunity.

/more than esoteric
 
2012-04-11 08:08:10 PM  

madgonad: I don't think that will help. Proving he was losing a fight (because he was a pussy) isn't going to help. Especially if he started the fight. Other evidence of him stalking the victim will hurt him too. What Zimmerman needs is evidence that Martin attacked him unprovoked. He also needs some evidence of injury. Something to show that he was in fear for his life or grievous bodily harm.


It's actually the other way around. The prosecution has to show that he stalked Martin (not the "following" while directing the police we hear on the call), confronted Martin, and attacked Martin unprovoked, and then has to show he had a depraved mind and was not in fear for his life or grievous bodily harm when he puled the trigger.

It's a somewhat important difference, in fact, our entire system of law is pretty much based on it.
 
Displayed 50 of 2460 comments

First | « | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | » | Last

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report