jennynd Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I bet the crime will go up drastically in FL. If I am a black, I will make sure my kid knows how to use a gun and have a gun with him everywhere he or she goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jennynd Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I bet the crime will go up drastically in FL. If I am a black, I will make sure my kid knows how to use a gun and have a gun with him everywhere he or she goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmilyK Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I'm just sick about this. I can't imagine how upset I'd be if my sons were African American, but I hurt for those friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 If Casey Anthony can survive, so can he. Maybe someone will hire her to kill him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unfrumpable. Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I bet the crime will go up drastically in FL. If I am a black, I will make sure my kid knows how to use a gun and have a gun with him everywhere he or she goes. That is doubtful. The crime rates are already high in the bigger cities, just like bigger cities everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unfrumpable. Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Maybe someone will hire her to kill him. Maybe he can do her in. I was so pissed when she walked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamajudy Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Maybe someone will hire her to kill him. Maybe he can do her in. I was so pissed when she walked. Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 That is doubtful. The crime rates are already high in the bigger cities, just like bigger cities everywhere. Crime in central Florida is high, city or not. When people can't support themselves through legal means, crime goes up. Self medication through drugs goes us. 1/4 of all homeless children in the entire United States live in Florida. Family homelessness is a shockingly large problem in central FL, especially Sanford. The main reason my brother's family moved here was that they would have soon been SOL in central FL- my brother previously worked in mortgages, 2007 was a hard year for them to say the least. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57330802/hard-times-generation-families-living-in-cars/ This is not an accident. Laws and policies make this problem much worse there than it is in many other equally economically depressed areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Wow. Dark humor. It helps people get through incredibly frustrating situations. Feign shock all you like. No one on this thread seriously wishes anyone else actual harm, be it Zimmerman or Anthony or Michael Bolton. I am the child of pacifist hippie non-violent activist Catholic pro-lifers. It took me a long time to reconcile that it was ok to use my fists to defend myself, much less attack others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unfrumpable. Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Dark humor. It helps people get through incredibly frustrating situations. Feign shock all you like. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 And if he'd been found guilty it would send the message that walking behind someone on a public road justifies that person coming and beating the crap out of you while you must lie there and take it. Especially if the perp is AA and you aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calledtobehome Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Having moved to FL a little over a year ago with two black male sons, I am saddened to say the least. Although, not surprised! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QueenCat Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Wow... What kind of message they send to young black people.... Do not walk into a white community Yep. Sick, disgusted and in tears here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 This is what it all boils down to, right? It is ridiculous, obnoxious, and stupid (and should be illegal as well as immoral) to get out of your car in the vicinity of someone who is so harmless as you all insist TM to be. Or maybe what you are really saying is that seeing a male black teen on a road should make us too afraid to leave our cars. He ... made the ridiculously obnoxious and stupid decision to get out of his car .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 And if he'd been found guilty it would send the message that walking behind someone on a public road justifies that person coming and beating the crap out of you while you must lie there and take it. Especially if the perp is AA and you aren't. Do you honestly think that's what happened? I don't. Zimmerman followed a particular person because he thought he was a thug and punk. He wasn't just following him on a public road. When confronted, why didn't Zimmerman run? If he really meant no harm, why didn't he bolt when/if confronted with someone angry? He didn't run. He confronted Martin as much as Martin confronted Zimmerman. The difference was the Zimmerman started it (for no good reason) and was armed. So, Zimmerman won and therefore gets off I really think this would have played out differently in the courts had Martin killed Zimmerman. I don't know how else to think in light of other Florida cases (such as Marissa Alexander). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happymomofboys Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 And if he'd been found guilty it would send the message that walking behind someone on a public road justifies that person coming and beating the crap out of you while you must lie there and take it. Especially if the perp is AA and you aren't. Not the message I would have gotten at all. More like, if I see someone suspicious and call the police who say they are sending someone, I should go on with my business and let the police handle it. I'm pretty sure if some random guy on the street had attacked Zimmerman as he happened to be out for a stroll, the reaction wouldn't be the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Thank goodness the people on the jury were better able to put their emotions aside than many people here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisbeth Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 This is what it all boils down to, right? It is ridiculous, obnoxious, and stupid (and should be illegal as well as immoral) to get out of your car in the vicinity of someone who is so harmless as you all insist TM to be. Amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I think if anything this verdict tells those who are followed/profiled to just take it, because if the other person pulls out a gun and kills you, you don't want them to have a scratch on them. You're supposed to let them accuse you of whatever they want. You're supposed to not run or defend yourself. You're supposed to not be scared, and if you are-suck it up, too bad. Really, we're all supposed to be armed so we can take out the other first. That way, we will get off. Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jennynd Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Thank goodness the people on the jury were better able to put their emotions aside than many people here. Or they made the decision simply because Zimmerman has a better lawyer? Is that really justice? A young kid die simply because he is a black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I think if anything this verdict tells those who are followed/profiled to just take it, because if the other person pulls out a gun and kills you, you don't want them to have a scratch on them. You're supposed to let them accuse you of whatever they want. You're supposed to not run or defend yourself. You're supposed to not be scared, and if you are-suck it up, too bad. Really, we're all supposed to be armed so we can take out the other first. That way, we will get off. Right? Well yes, I think it's reasonable to say that if you are being followed or profiled, the right response is NOT to punch someone etc. You can run if you feel like it, but there is no need to defend yourself (via violence) from being followed or profiled. Scared? I've been scared plenty of times, but unsubstantiated fear is nothing - I mean, if you're not AA, being straddled and bashed around even isn't scary enough to justify self-defense, right? Or are there different rules for different people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChristusG Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 All this back and forth is crazy. The only people who know what truly happened that night is God and Zimmerman. Zimmerman could be completely guilt free or he could be lying through his teeth. We'll never know. I'm just glad that I didn't have the stress of being the jurors. Those poor people are going to get major flack. And they had the same murky evidence and stories to sort through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I don't have a problem with the jury decision. I'm glad I wasn't on the jury and faced with this awful decision. I don't have a problem with SYG laws. At all. I do have a problem with being able to basicly retry someone for the same crime in civil court. I don't think it should be permitted. If someone has a problem that the manslaughter laws in FL are too difficult to navigate or that there needs to be another option, then they should petition to have the laws reflect that. And I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with that either. Twitter is already screaming for a mob lynching. I have a problem with that. Those jurors made a verdict that they have to live AI and they should have felt ZERO pressure from mob mentality craziness and media racism hype in making that decision. I'm actually only surprised bc I expected them to cave to community pressure. I don't think Zimmerman is the only person who is going to want to move ASAP. I bet those 6 women will too. I don't have any faith whatsoever in our justice system. I think only the naive ever do. Maybe that's just me being jaded tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charcat13 Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/13/19457593-it-director-who-alleged-evidence-withheld-from-zimmerman-defense-fired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 On the other hand... http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/ 20 years for warning shots? Unbelievable! What law was that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tabinfl Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 In defense of Florida... Florida is a very diverse state. Much of the population wasn't born here, demographics are skewed by snowbirds (many of whom are not US citizens), and there is a perpetual culture clash between natives and transplants, especially those from the northeast. The economy has not been kind to parts of the state, and the rapid, erratic growth in some areas has left gaping infrastructure holes into which the most vulnerable in our population fall during the hard times. Look around your own town and state. Look at the crimes committed there, whether or not justice (in your opinion) prevailed or the stories made the national news. Look at the lower-income areas of your community, and the racism, bigotry, and intolerance surrounding them (whether aimed inward, outward, or both). Look at the laws on your state's books, the ones you'd overturn tomorrow if you were put in charge, or the ones that seemed like a good idea until someone managed to pervert them into something for which they were never intended. Is any of that representative of you, your neighbors, or your friends? This entire situation is a tragedy, played out in the national spotlight. The news has done a great job of airing Florida's dirty laundry all over the world. There's a lot to pick on in Florida right now, at least until the Texas legislature makes its next move. Regardless, I love my life here. I am surrounded by natural beauty every day, from my own yard to the many parks, beaches, and cultural centers within a half-hour drive. My kids have a yard to play in, a nice big one, something we'd probably not be able to afford where my husband or I grew up. Some of the kindest, most generous, thoughtful, and downright awesome people I've ever met live here. Some are gun-totin' rednecks. A few live in & near Sanford. I can assure you, we are all just as horrified by this whole situation as you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msjones Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trish Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 This wouldn't be the same as retrying OJ. In his case, there was enough evidence to suggest that he committed the murder. In the Zimmerman case, there is no question at all that he killed Trayvon. But the self defense aspect makes it justifiable. I don't know how easy it would be to get around that in a civil trial. Anyway, the homeowners' association has already shelled out a lot of money, I think. It was fortunate for GZ that the jury had less emotional jurors on the case than the people here. The ruled on the facts of the case rather than their feelings. I certainly feel sorry for the Martin family, but from what I watched there is no way the prosecution had enough evidenced to disprove a self defense claim (and thereby prove guilt.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 20 years for warning shots? Unbelievable! What law was that? The better not be black and charged with a crime law, unless you are fantastically famous or wealthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Makes total sense. :wacko: And this woman shot at a man who was violating an existing restraining order in her own home. Don't anyone even try to argue with me that racism is not at play in our criminal justice system. I'm going go punch something now. Nope. I will dig up a better article for you. --She had moved out of the home but was going back to visit her husband. --She started the physical altercation, LEFT THE VICINITY OF THE HUSBAND TO GET THE FIREARM (in the garage in a vehicle), then reentered to fire the warning shots. The shots were fired into the area her stepsons were located. --After being arrested, she returned to the home and assaulted her husband the same night she was released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I think it sends a message to *all* Florida residents-last one alive wins. Don't bother trying to talk it out or messing around with a lesser degree of violence. Shoot to kill every time. The gun lobbies will get you off. You do realize that the core of Florida's self defense law(and what applied here - reasonable belief of great bodily harm) is the as almost every other state, right? Also duty to retreat generally doesn't apply once you are under physical attack and certainly doesn't apply once the assailant is on top of you, and this again is true in every state. I know you desperately want this to be a SYG issue but it simply isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jennynd Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Well yes, I think it's reasonable to say that if you are being followed or profiled, the right response is NOT to punch someone etc. You can run if you feel like it, but there is no need to defend yourself (via violence) from being followed or profiled. Scared? I've been scared plenty of times, but unsubstantiated fear is nothing - I mean, if you're not AA, being straddled and bashed around even isn't scary enough to justify self-defense, right? Or are there different rules for different people? So you suggest is that if you are a AA or Mexican which are both frequently profiled, if confronted with a gun, you should not fight. And do whatever they other guy told you to even though he is not a cop? Because if you fight back and get killed, it will be entirely your fault? Really? I hate to say this, but is that a situation you want your kids to be in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 20 years for warning shots? Unbelievable! What law was that? Florida's 10-20-life ( also called Use a Gun and You're Done) applies minimum sentencing standards to any crime with a firearm (generally raises the level of the crime by one and applies a higher minimum sentence). The state also argued the shots were not warming shots but directed into an area occupied by her stepsons, and I believe forensics showed that to be the case. Her biggest mistake after reentering the home with a firearm and discharging it was turning down a plea agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 So you suggest is that if you are a AA or Mexican which are both frequently profiled, if confronted with a gun, you should not fight. And do whatever they other guy told you to even though he is not a cop? Because if you fight back and get killed, it will be entirely your fault? Really? I hate to say this, but is that a situation you want your kids to be in? You do realize there was not any evidence presented that showed GZ confronted TM with the gun, ordered him to do anything, or that TM was defending himself, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 So you suggest is that if you are a AA or Mexican which are both frequently profiled, if confronted with a gun, you should not fight. And do whatever they other guy told you to even though he is not a cop? Because if you fight back and get killed, it will be entirely your fault? Really? I hate to say this, but is that a situation you want your kids to be in? If my kids get shot while straddling and beating up someone who turns out to have a gun, I will cry for a long time and wonder what on earth made them think it was a good idea to put a person in a position where that person feared death/severe bodily harm. I fully expect that my children will suffer discrimination and profiling all their lives. This makes me very sad. But it does not make me want my kids to feel they have carte blanche for beating people up every time they suspect they are being profiled. If they decide to tangle with someone physically, it's obvious they increase the likelihood of being harmed themselves. There are other ways to address these issues - not perfect, but smacking someone around isn't a solution at all. As noted, there's no evidence that GZ started this thing by confronting TM with a gun or told TM to do anything. There was nothing to "fight back" against as far as we know. Not liking the way someone is looking at you is not a reason to get violent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NicksMama-Zack's Mama Too Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I don't watch television and I just read about what was testified to during the trial. I found this article pretty much lined up with how I felt about what read and I saw on video of the testimony given in court. http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/13/3499114_p4/state-never-proved-its-case-legal.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 And if he'd been found guilty it would send the message that walking behind someone on a public road justifies that person coming and beating the crap out of you while you must lie there and take it. Especially if the perp is AA and you aren't. Walking behind someone?? Really? Are you seriously suggesting all he did was "walk behind him" like they both happened to be out for a stroll? A "perp" is a police suspect, which Martin was not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 You do realize that the core of Florida's self defense law(and what applied here - reasonable belief of great bodily harm) is the as almost every other state, right? Also duty to retreat generally doesn't apply once you are under physical attack and certainly doesn't apply once the assailant is on top of you, and this again is true in every state. I know you desperately want this to be a SYG issue but it simply isn't. There is no "duty to retreat" in Florida's SYG laws. http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133 Defendants claiming "stand your ground" are more likely to prevail if the victim is black. Seventy-three percent of those who killed a black person faced no penalty compared to 59 percent of those who killed a white. People often go free under "stand your ground" in cases that seem to make a mockery of what lawmakers intended. One man killed two unarmed people and walked out of jail. Another shot a man as he lay on the ground. Others went free after shooting their victims in the back. In nearly a third of the cases the Times analyzed, defendants initiated the fight, shot an unarmed person or pursued their victim — and still went free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NASDAQ Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 There is no "duty to retreat" in Florida's SYG laws. http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133 Yes, and she's explaining that _even if there were_ it would be completely irrelevant to this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Yes, and she's explaining that _even if there were_ it would be completely irrelevant to this case. SYG was still discussed during the trial. Whether or not it is a SYG case there is still a long history of issues with the law in the state. She used the phrase "duty to retreat" and I was commenting that "duty to retreat" is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NASDAQ Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I can read. I assume you edited it because the previous version made no sense. Why do you keep bring up SYG when it is irrelevant to the Zimmerman case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I assume you edited it because the previous version made no sense. Why do you keep bring up SYG when it is irrelevant to the Zimmerman case? I did not bring it up. I was commenting on another post. Am I not allowed to do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I assume you edited it because the previous version made no sense. Why do you keep bring up SYG when it is irrelevant to the Zimmerman case? We are discussing the various laws that apply to these sorts of cases and explaining why we disagree with them. Are you suggesting that topic isn't in any way relevant to the Zimmerman case in general? Did you actually read the article? It highlighted several of the issues we have been discussing. For example: • In West Palm Beach, Christopher Cote started pounding on the door of neighbor Jose Tapanes at 4 a.m. after an argument over Cote's dog. Tapanes stepped outside and fired his shotgun twice, killing Cote. A jury acquitted him, but prosecutors and a judge had discounted Tapanes' self-defense claim, saying if he was truly afraid for his life, he should not have stepped outside So, *it is* relevant that Zimmerman got out of his car and followed Martin. These laws (both SYG and the newer self-defense laws) are *too broad*. They put too great of a burden on the prosecution, and now we have lots of stone-cold and/or violent killers who start fights and finish those fights with their gun walking free. As "stand your ground" claims have increased, so too has the number of Floridians with guns. Concealed weapons permits now stand at 1.1 million, three times as many as in 2005 when the law was passed. "I think the (stand your ground) law has an emboldening effect. All of a sudden, you're a tough guy and can be aggressive,'' said George Kirkham, a professor emeritus at Florida State University who has worked as a police officer. I think this is exactly what happened in the Zimmerman case. I don't think he would have left him car, followed Martin and/or gotten in a confrontation with him if he had not been carrying a loaded gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizzyBee Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 There is no "duty to retreat" in Florida's SYG laws. http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133 Thanks for posting the article. It was very enlightening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaKinVA Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2012-05-11/story/jacksonville-woman-sentenced-20-years-prison-stand-your-ground This article seems to have a lot more information regarding the evidence in the Alexander Case that is now being posted everywhere on FB. She was charged with three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, because there were two young boys standing in the direction in which she fired. She was offered a 3-year plea, and declined. I would find SYG or Self Defense more believable if she had stayed in the garage with her gun and he had followed her out there. But, he didn't follow her. She went back inside the house, armed and fired a shot at him from across the room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2012-05-11/story/jacksonville-woman-sentenced-20-years-prison-stand-your-ground This article seems to have a lot more information regarding the evidence in the Alexander Case that is now being posted everywhere on FB. She was charged with three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, because there were two young boys standing in the direction in which she fired. She was offered a 3-year plea, and declined. I would find SYG or Self Defense more believable if she had stayed in the garage with her gun and he had followed her out there. But, he didn't follow her. She went back inside the house, armed and fired a shot at him from across the room. What a mess. Depending on whether you believe what the prosecution or the defense says about where the children were. If she fired in the direction that could have harmed the children, it makes the prosecution more understandable. And it makes a huge difference in her returning with the gun if the garage door was locked so she couldn't get out. I detest mandatory sentencing laws: 20 years and no one got hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 There is no "duty to retreat" in Florida's SYG laws. Duty to retreat does not apply when already physically engaged, and the prosecution would still have had to disprove self defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Note - Zimmerman never asserted SYG in his defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livetoread Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 I think if you are armed, you have an even higher moral obligation to avoid confrontation. None of us know what happened between the time Zimmerman got out of his car and the physical fight began. Zimmerman has shown himself to be untrustworthy and I think it likely he lied about what happened. Maybe he yelled something aggressive, maybe he tried to grab Martin. And maybe Martin really did start the physical part of the confrontation, who knows. I do know two guys could have made choices to deescalate things, and now one is dead. I hold Zimmerman more responsible than Martin, even if Martin did escalate it. When you are armed (and the adult) you need to have a real good understanding that things can go wrong quickly and make choices accordingly. I also have little doubt that if we had the exact same scenario and Martin was a white female, Zimmerman would be found guilty. I also think if Zimmerman had been an armed black male patrolling his mostly black neighborhood, had muttered the same things Zimmerman did, and shot a white teen, he would be found guilty. Race plays a role in how threatening we see situations, unfair though it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Duty to retreat does not apply when already physically engaged, and the prosecution would still have had to disprove self defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Note - Zimmerman never asserted SYG in his defense. Zimmerman did not seek immunity under SYG, however they could have done later if the trial did not go their way. The reason it wasn't a SYG case was because the defense didn't seek it, they always had that option. A SYG immunity hearing would have involved putting Zimmerman on the stand, something many defendants prefer to avoid. It can be difficult to have a clear memory, particularly when one was injured during an altercation. Because they were in an altercation simple self defense laws were utilized, but SYG could have been invoked later, it is a weaker defense than simple self defense. George Zimmerman, charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin, waived his right Tuesday to seek immunity under Florida’s “stand your ground†self-defense law before his June trial. His lawyers have said they may seek immunity later. http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/30/17983728-zimmerman-waives-stand-your-ground-defense-for-now?lite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Zimmerman did not seek immunity under SYG, however they could have done later if the trial did not go their way. The reason it wasn't a SYG case was because the defense didn't seek it, they always had that option. A SYG immunity hearing would have involved putting Zimmerman on the stand, something many defendants prefer to avoid. It can be difficult to have a clear memory, particularly when one was injured during an altercation. Because they were in an altercation simple self defense laws were utilized, but SYG could have been invoked later, it is a weaker defense than simple self defense. http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/30/17983728-zimmerman-waives-stand-your-ground-defense-for-now?lite But it wasn't invoked and didn't play a role in the acquittal. So we agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts