Trayvon Martin

[Pack18Alex]

stand your ground

 

Except this case had nothing to do with Florida's "stand your ground" law ... it's hard to retreat from a threat when someone is beating you to a pulp and smashing your head against the pavement.

Should Trayvon Martin survived being shot and been on trial for Assault and Battery and Attempted Murder, he would have a SYG defense for being followed and fearing for his life. The PROBLEM with the TM SYG claim is the testimony of his friend, who told the court that he told her he was "safe" and "steps away" from his home. The fight took place near GZ's vehicle, NOT near the home.

 

So if GZ gets out of the vehicle, TM is right there and clocks him, I think TM has a SYG defense (which, by my understanding in Florida, doesn't remove GZ's unless GZ broke the law in creating the situation, which he didn't do). However, if TM chose to "retreat" and gets home, then returns to confront GZ, then TM doesn't have a SYG defense. Given the lack of evidence, my guess is that they are both acquitted from lack of evidence, unless you can recreate his location from phone GPS data.

 

SYG removes the obligation to retreat, but not the option. Once you retreat from the conflict, you no longer have a SYG claim if you counter-attack.

 

GZ's story: got out of car, followed, told to not follow, was returning to vehicle and looking around for an address when sucker-punched by TM.

RJ's story: TM was scared, got home and was "safe," then went quiet and became out of breath (presumably running), and asked GZ why he was being followed.

 

The "Get Off Me" comment is the only evidence that GZ started the physical altercation. However, if his hoodie was grabbed, he has non-lethal self defense. It's unclear that TM reasonably feared for his life, if so, he may SYG and attempt to kill GZ. If he didn't, he doesn't have the right to escalate to lethal force.

[Peregrinator]

An all white jury found Zimmerman not guilty after he killed a kid for being black.

I highly doubt that Zimmerman shot the Trayvon Martin because he was black.

 

 

 

I think folks are forgetting a few things and not thinking analytically. One, as jblake47 and others have tried to point out - jury trials such as these do not have an objective to prove someone innocent. The judges direction to the jury was to determine if George Zimmerman acted in self-defense or in legalese - if the death of Trayvon Martin resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force and that a person is justified in using deadly force if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself. The jury was also instructed to judge Zimmerman by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used, that the danger facing George Zimmerman need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force.

 

 

 

There was conflicting testimony - there was very different testimony by several witnesses stating who was the aggressor. So, for me - concluding that there was reasonable doubt was the correct verdict. That doesn't mean that Zimmerman acted properly. Also, I believe the jury was 100% female, as was the Circuit judge and no one is claiming gender issues? (It was not 100% white as some have claimed. Five where white and one Hispanic.) The fact that Trayvon Martin did not simply go home or that Zimmerman should have stayed in his car or not followed Martin are irrelevant to the case at hand. It did not matter how the confrontation came to be - if Zimmerman was profiling, if Martin was looking for a fight - it only mattered that when Zimmerman fired a bullet through Trayvon's heart, was the appearance of danger so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person believe that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force?

 

 

I do pretty much agree that Zimmerman acted improperly, but not illegally. It would have been better for all concerned, if he had stayed in his vehicle. That said, it's easy to say that in hindsight, and not living in a neighborhood that has been burglarized several times.

packsaddle, the instructions to the jury contained a lot of stuff that simply did not apply to the case. SYG is part of the standard jury instruction where the defendant claims self-defense. See the addendum near the bottom of the following article:

http://reason.com/blog/2013/07/14/sorry-the-zimmerman-case-still-has-nothi

 

The fact that a legal provision was mentioned in the instructions does not necessarily mean it was relevant in reaching a verdict. For example, the instructions also mentioned accidental killings and attacks on dwellings, neither of which applies to the circumstances of the encounter between Zimmerman and Martin.

 

Hope this helps.

[packsaddle]

stand your ground

 

Except this case had nothing to do with Florida's "stand your ground" law ... it's hard to retreat from a threat when someone is beating you to a pulp and smashing your head against the pavement.

Speculation on top of speculation. So GZ says, and so, evidently, those who make GZ into a victim want to believe.

[King Ding Dong]

l leave this here for discussiong. http://www.ijreview.com/2013/07/65699-the-trayvon-martin-case-in-pictures/I

Go ahead and discuss. We are waiting.

[moosetracker]

stand your ground

 

Except this case had nothing to do with Florida's "stand your ground" law ... it's hard to retreat from a threat when someone is beating you to a pulp and smashing your head against the pavement.

Pack18Alex "It's unclear that TM reasonably feared for his life"

 

Huh???? TM is dead, shot to death by GZ, and yet you question if it was reasonable for TM to fear for his life??? I would say beyond a shadow of a doubt, that "yes", he correctly had reason to.