Stand Your Ground Law

[loveoforganic2]

But it escalated a situation that wouldn't have happened. Are you saying Trayvon was is the wrong place at the wrong time?

Following someone is not grounds for assault or the use of deadly force

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[loveoforganic2]

So if someone suspicious follows you you're supposed to let them?

You're sure not supposed to assault them. I would keep my distance and yell out something like "hey buddy, can I help you?" and judge intent from there

 

[shibby1111]

That was uncalled for. Don't insult me as I haven't insulted you.

That's fine. I apologize. But, bro, if you are getting attacked (or reasonably fearful of being attacked), you are well within your right to defend yourself even if it involves deadly force.

 

[periopdoc]

But it escalated a situation that wouldn't have happened. Are you saying Trayvon was is the wrong place at the wrong time?

Who knows/ cares what Martin was really up to that night. It is irrelevant to the ultimate guilt/ innocence of Zimmerman. The law says the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did not fear of death or great bodily injury from Martin at the time that he drew his gun and shot him.

Did the prosecution prove that?

- pod

 

[Telekinesis]

Following someone is not grounds for assault or the use of deadly force

We don't know if Zimmerman drew the gun first. For all we know Trayvon was defending himself.

 

[Telekinesis]

Who knows/ cares what Martin was really up to that night. It is irrelevant to the ultimate guilt/ innocence of Zimmerman. The law says the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did not fear of death or great bodily injury from Martin at the time that he drew his gun and shot him.

Did the prosecution prove that?

- pod

I guess you're right.

 

[Telekinesis]

You're sure not supposed to assault them. I would keep my distance and yell out something like "hey buddy, can I help you?" and judge intent from there

Agreed, but Martin was a 17 yr old boy. 17 yr olds are stupid. I think Zimmerman could have done other things if he actually stopped for a second and thought about his actions.

 

[shibby1111]

So if someone suspicious follows you you're supposed to let them?

Some people don't have thick enough skulls to be able to survive multiple blows to the face and slams on the concrete sidewalk.

 

[Telekinesis]

That's fine. I apologize. But, bro, if you are getting attacked (or reasonably fearful of being attacked), you are well within your right to defend yourself even if it involves deadly force.

I guess I disagree here. I agree with responding with equal force. It's like a child is playing with the electrical socket and you cut their hand off to prevent them from doing it again.

 

[BLADEMDA]

The elephant on this discussion board is who was Treyvon Martin. Many of us in Florida have heard reports of his past in Miami. BLACK, White, Hisanic, etc doesn't change the fact Treyvon was a punk looking for a fight. He knew Zimmeran was no match for him so rather than head home he decided to pulverize GZ.
Fortunately, GZ was armed that night and fought back in self defense in the only way he knew how.

Nobody is happy when a good kid dies in an altercation especially an upstanding member of the black community. We need more upstanding members of all minority classes in the USA to be successful role models. Treyvon made a stupid decision that night which cost him his life.

GZ made some bad choices as well that evening but he never intended or planned to kill Treyvon. On the contrary, GZ wanted to question Treyvon and wait for the police. There was no malice or hatred towards blacks on the part of GZ just the desire to catch criminals.

The jury will find GZ not guilty and that is the right decision.

 

[shibby1111]

I guess I disagree here. I agree with responding with equal force. It's like a child is playing with the electrical socket and you cut their hand off to prevent them from doing it again.

LMFAO. Wow. So applying that same line of logic: If a burglary suspect fires 2 rounds a cop. Does the cop only get to fire 2 rounds back? Like wild, wild west style?

Zimmerman used deadly force to stop the attack on him, right there, right then, not to prevent Martin from attacking someone else in the future.

 

[BLADEMDA]

I guess I disagree here. I agree with responding with equal force. It's like a child is playing with the electrical socket and you cut their hand off to prevent them from doing it again.

If you attack someone in Florida and they are carrying concealed you will be shot.

 

[Telekinesis]

If you attack someone in Florida and they are carrying concealed you will be shot.

Fortunately I'm an upstanding member of society so I'm not looking to attack anyone.

 

[Telekinesis]

LMFAO. Wow. So applying that same line of logic: If a burglary suspect fires 2 rounds a cop. Does the cop only get to fire 2 rounds back? Like wild, wild west style?

Zimmerman used deadly force to stop the attack on him, right there, right then, not to prevent Martin from attacking someone else in the future.

I meant force enough to stop him not kill him.

 

[loveoforganic2]

Agreed, but Martin was a 17 yr old boy. 17 yr olds are stupid. I think Zimmerman could have done other things if he actually stopped for a second and thought about his actions.

17 y/o's are indeed stupid. Unfortunately, you play stupid games you win stupid prizes. I'm lucky to have survived being 17 - I took a corner at a highway junction going 75 in a 45 and my tires broke loose on me - almost threw my car into a 6 foot deep ditch lined by pine trees. If that had happened, in all likelihood I would have died. It would have been very tragic. It would have been my ******* 17 y/o fault.

I guess I disagree here. I agree with responding with equal force. It's like a child is playing with the electrical socket and you cut their hand off to prevent them from doing it again.

If someone has bashed your head into the cement, they have used potentially lethal or seriously debilitating force against you, and you have the right to respond w/the same level of force. I'm glad you have survived that assault - I'm sure the majority of people who experience this do. The fatality rate for GSW's is also only about 20% - that doesn't mean it isn't also lethal force

 

[loveoforganic2]

I meant force enough to stop him not kill him.

This should be the intent of ALL self defense shootings (any act of self defense in general, frankly). You shoot to STOP the aggressor, NOT to kill them. Death is an accepted possible outcome, but it is not necessarily the intent of the use of lethal force. If GZ intended to KILL TM (not merely stop the assault on himself), why did he fire a single round?

 

[BLADEMDA]

Stand your ground
What: Florida law gives victims the right to shoot an attacker, instead of retreating. Known as the Stand Your Ground Law, the statute provides for self-defense if a person faces the threat of death or great bodily harm. The law only applies if the victim is engaged in lawful activity in a place he or she has a legal right to be.

Did you know? The law came under fire last year after Sanford neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman allegedly shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, who was unarmed. Zimmerman contends he acted in self-defense.

 

[periopdoc]

Note, I am not saying that Zimmerman was innocent, just that the state failed to prove that he was guilty. I can see multiple, equally plausible scenarios from the evidence we have.

1 - Martin, fearful of a stranger that was following him, hides from the stranger. Thinking that the stranger has passed by, he emerges from hiding only to bump into that stranger. An altercation occurs and Martin is shot.

2 - Martin, fearful of a stranger that was following him, drops what he is carrying and runs for his father's house. He returns after a short while to retrieve his items and bumps into Zimmerman. An altercation occurs...

3 - Martin initially fearful of a stranger that was following him runs for his father's house, on the way he decides that he is more man than that and returns to confront Zimmerman...

4 - Martin, seeing Zimmerman following him, hides and jumps Zimmerman.

5 - Zimmerman, sick of these F'ing punks terrorizing the neighborhood and getting away with it exits vehicle with the intention of shooting Martin. Draws his gun and chases down Martin. A scuffle ensues.

6 - Zimmerman exits vehicle with the intention of following Martin and keeping him in sight until the cops arrive. When told the police don't need him to follow, he ignores the dispatcher and continues to follow Martin...

7 - Zimmerman exits vehicle with the intention of following Martin and keeping him in sight until the cops arrive. When told the police don't need him to follow, he stops and returns to his vehicle. Before he can get back, he encounters Martin.


From the evidence presented at trial, and I have watched the whole damn thing, any one of these scenarios is possible. Two of them are Murder 2. The state did not prove that scenario beyond a reasonable doubt. Several could be manslaughter. The state failed to disprove Zimmerman's claim that it was not a manslaughter scenario.

Several of these scenarios can represent an unfortunate series of events that resulted in the catastrophic meeting despite no ill will from either party.

- pod

 

[shibby1111]

I meant force enough to stop him not kill him.

What other option did he have??? He tried blocking the punches. He maneuvered himself away from the side walk. He cried "HELP, HELP, HELP!" He used his last resort.

 

[loveoforganic2]

Who knows/ cares what Martin was really up to that night. It is irrelevant to the ultimate guilt/ innocence of Zimmerman. The law says the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did not fear of death or great bodily injury from Martin at the time that he drew his gun and shot him.

Did the prosecution prove that?

- pod

My understanding is for affirmative defense in Florida, the defense produces evidence that it was an act of self defense, w/acquittal requiring only a preponderance of evidence.

 

[Telekinesis]

What other option did he have??? He tried blocking the punches. He maneuvered himself away from the side walk. He cried "HELP, HELP, HELP!" He used his last resort.

I just don't see how a child could overpower a grown man who trained in MMA to that extent.

 

[periopdoc]

I was wondering when this thread was going to explode again.

- pod

 

[BLADEMDA]

· In January, a judge in Miami tossed out a second-degree murder charge against Greyston Garcia after he chased a suspected burglar for more than a block and stabbed him to death. The judge decided the stabbing was justified because the burglar had swung a bag of stolen car radios at Garcia – an object that a medical examiner at a hearing testified could cause "serious harm or death." The judge found Garcia was "well within his rights to pursue the victim and demand the return of his property."

 

[shibby1111]

Note, I am not saying that Zimmerman was innocent, just that the state failed to prove that he was guilty. I can see multiple, equally plausible scenarios from the evidence we have.

1 - Martin, fearful of a stranger that was following him, hides from the stranger. Thinking that the stranger has passed by, he emerges from hiding only to bump into that stranger. An altercation occurs and Martin is shot.

2 - Martin, fearful of a stranger that was following him, drops what he is carrying and runs for his father's house. He returns after a short while to retrieve his items and bumps into Zimmerman. An altercation occurs...

3 - Martin initially fearful of a stranger that was following him runs for his father's house, on the way he decides that he is more man than that and returns to confront Zimmerman...

4 - Martin, seeing Zimmerman following him, hides and jumps Zimmerman.

5 - Zimmerman, sick of these F'ing punks terrorizing the neighborhood and getting away with it exits vehicle with the intention of shooting Martin. Draws his gun and chases down Martin. A scuffle ensues.

6 - Zimmerman exits vehicle with the intention of following Martin and keeping him in sight until the cops arrive. When told the police don't need him to follow, he ignores the dispatcher and continues to follow Martin...

7 - Zimmerman exits vehicle with the intention of following Martin and keeping him in sight until the cops arrive. When told the police don't need him to follow, he stops and returns to his vehicle. Before he can get back, he encounters Martin.


From the evidence presented at trial, and I have watched the whole damn thing, any one of these scenarios is possible. Two of them are Murder 2. The state did not prove that scenario beyond a reasonable doubt. Several could be manslaughter. The state failed to disprove Zimmerman's claim that it was not a manslaughter scenario.

Several of these scenarios can represent an unfortunate series of events that resulted in the catastrophic meeting despite no ill will from either party.

- pod

Interesting points. Wouldn't #5 be first degree murder, if he had hatred towards a group of people (those f'ing punks) and eventually found a member of that group who he intended to kill?

 

[IJL]

I just don't see how a child could overpower a grown man who trained in MMA to that extent.

By "child" you mean a 6'0'' 17 year old, and by "trained in MMA" you mean Zimmerman's trainer wouldn't even let him fight against a punching bag because he was so bad.

 

[Telekinesis]

By "child" you mean a 6'0'' 17 year old, and by "trained in MMA" you mean his trainer wouldn't even let him fight against a punching bag because he was so bad.

Zimmerman trained in MMA not Martin

 

[shibby1111]

Zimmerman trained in MMA not Martin

That's what the above poster meant.

 

[periopdoc]

Interesting points. Wouldn't #5 be first degree murder, if he had hatred towards a group of people (those f'ing punks) and eventually found a member of that group who he intended to kill?

Yes, my original post said there was only one Murder 2 scenario in there (meaning scenario 5). I edited it to add that scenario 4 could also be Murder 2.

Confusing edit.

Sorry.

I need to read more carefully sometimes.

- pod

 

[shibby1111]

And I've been slammed on the concrete many times, even knocked out before. I still wouldn't use a weapon.

Recently?

 

[Telekinesis]

Recently?

Nah when I was a pro wrestler.

 

[loveoforganic2]

I just don't see how a child could overpower a grown man who trained in MMA to that extent.

By "child" you mean a 6'0'' 17 year old, and by "trained in MMA" you mean his trainer wouldn't even let him fight against a punching bag because he was so bad.

Yeah, I don't understand the repeated characterizations as a "child" like it's meaningful or that being moderately heavier is a significant advantage when that weight doesn't come in the form of something other than adipose.

Edit: to be clear, I'm 6' and hover under 140. I'm a pretty small guy, but I have like, 0% body fat, which seems similar to TM. I respect size - big heavy arms can do big damage moving slowly. I'd still take myself over a chunky 180 pounder in a street fight though

Interesting points. Wouldn't #5 be first degree murder, if he had hatred towards a group of people (those f'ing punks) and eventually found a member of that group who he intended to kill?

Should be second degree murder. First is premeditated

 

[shibby1111]

Nah when I was a pro wrestler.

Isn't pro wresting performed on a spring boarded, canvass box?

 

[Telekinesis]

Isn't pro wresting performed on a spring boarded, canvass box?

Nah you'll think that though. More akin to wood and steel. And sometimes I did no holds barred matches when I was thrown into all kinds of stuff.

 

[loveoforganic2]

f

 

[loveoforganic2]

Nah you'll think that though. More akin to wood and steel. And sometimes I did no holds barred matches when I was thrown into all kinds of stuff.

When you said "smashed onto cement" I assumed you meant "maliciously had your head smashed into cement". Consensual fighting is not close to equivalent. You were very wise in not shooting your attacker in a consensual play fight. :|

 

[shibby1111]

Nah you'll think that though. More akin to wood and steel. And sometimes I did no holds barred matches when I was thrown into all kinds of stuff.

hahaha. those "steel" trash cans? those "wooden" fold out tables? did you wear one of those little speedos?

 

[Telekinesis]

hahaha. those "steel" trash cans? those "wooden" fold out tables? did you wear one of those little speedos?

They're called trunks!!!

 

[Telekinesis]

hahaha. those "steel" trash cans? those "wooden" fold out tables? did you wear one of those little speedos?

I've gotten hit with steel chairs though and slammed on concrete. Never did the table or trash can though.

 

[BLADEMDA]

I just don't see how a child could overpower a grown man who trained in MMA to that extent.

GZ was a poor example of a person skilled in martial arts. If he was any good Trayvon wouldn't have died from a bullet wound that night. The exact reason I carry a gun is because my Karate sucks.

 

[D P356]

Interestingly, after watching the proceedings of this trial, my opinion remains unchanged.....that lawyers are still dirtbags.

 

[loveoforganic2]

Isn't pro wresting performed on a spring boarded, canvass box?

It's boards on a metal frame, covered in a slightly cushy/velvety substance (dunno what to call it). It doesn't flex noticeably when you walk around on it, but it's waaaaaay better than cement or even packed dirt for falling down on (you can hit the mat without having the air knocked out of you)

 

[Telekinesis]

It's boards on a metal frame, covered in a slightly cushy/velvety substance (dunno what to call it). It doesn't flex noticeably when you walk around on it, but it's waaaaaay better than cement or even packed dirt for falling down on (you can hit the mat without having the air knocked out of you)

That's only on TV. Very rarely is there cushioning on the ring in the Indys

 

[BLADEMDA]

The legal standard for second-degree murder in Florida would require the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman killed Martin by criminal act, demonstrating “a depraved mind without regard for human life.” That requirement would incorporate the necessity for the prosecution to prove that the killing was “done from ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent.” Manslaughter, a charge the jury will be allowed to consider, requires only that Zimmerman “intentionally committed an act or acts that caused the death of Trayvon Martin.” Self-defense is Zimmerman’s defense to both charges.

 

[BLADEMDA]

A Miami man stepped out of his home and shot his ex-wife's boyfriend at least 12 times as he sat in a car. A Jacksonville man standing in his garage shot to death an 18-year-old burglary suspect who was running away from his house. A West Palm Beach teenager shot an unarmed man he thought was demanding drugs.

But the Times found similarly questionable cases in which the victim was white or Hispanic. It also found that mixed-race cases — like that of Martin — are relatively rare.

Of the 88 fatal "stand your ground'' cases that have been decided, only about a fourth involved defendants and victims of different races — including six cases in which a white killed a black, five cases in which a black killed a white and six in which a Hispanic killed a non-Hispanic.

No charges were filed in most of those mixed-race cases.

Often, the self-defense circumstances were evident: A person was being robbed or beaten.

In other cases, the type that critics of "stand your ground'' consider questionable, people killed and went free when they might have avoided a conflict:

• Damian Niemeyer was standing at the bedroom window of his Royal Palm Beach townhouse in December when he saw three men trying to back his motorcycle onto a truck. He called 911, then yelled at the men. When one pointed a gun at the window, Niemeyer, who is white, fatally shot Benjy Young, a black teenager.

• Hygens Labidou, who is black, was driving in Deerfield Beach in 2007 when two white men jumped out of their pickup, pounded on his truck and yelled racial slurs. Labidou, still inside his car, fired his gun, striking both men and killing 28-year-old Edward Borowsky.

• In Pompano Beach in 2010, Patrick Lavoie, a white man, jumped out of his girlfriend's car and accused Cleveland Murdock, a black man, of tailgating. When Lavoie, who had a cigarette lighter in his hand, tried to reach through Murdock's passenger window, Murdock fatally shot him.

Among the few people to be charged in a mixed-race case: Gabriel Mobley, a black Miami Lakes man.

Four years ago, Mobley and some friends started arguing with two white patrons at a Chili's restaurant. When the bar closed, the dispute moved outside and one of the men punched Mobley's friend in the face. Mobley shot and killed both men.

Though Mobley claimed he was acting in self-defense, surveillance video showed one victim had his hands up when he was killed and the other did not seem to be reaching for a weapon. Neither man was armed.

After investigating for months, prosecutors charged Mobley with second-degree murder in what they called a key test of the "stand your ground" law.

Mobley's arrest was "very important because it sends a clear message,'' Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez-Rundle said at the time. "The Legislature passed the 'stand your ground' law, but it is not a free-for-all to execute people.''

A closer look

If the Martin case fueled the perception that Florida's "stand your ground'' law is biased against blacks, the Marissa Alexander case has ignited it.

Alexander, a 31-year-old black Jacksonville woman, told police in 2010 that she had fired a warning shot to get her abusive husband out of the house during an argument in which his two young children were present. No one was hurt, but a judge denied Alexander's motion for immunity from prosecution.

In March, a jury convicted Alexander on three charges of aggravated assault, which carry a mandatory sentence of 20 years in prison. Her lawyer, Kevin Cobbin, complained that "stand your ground" was not being used as legislators intended.

"They did not make (the law) for people running around on the streets shooting people,'' Cobbin said. "They made it for women in their homes trying to defend themselves against abusive, mean men.''

A closer look at Alexander's case reveals a more complex story. After arguing with Rico Gray, her husband, Alexander went to the garage, got a gun from her car and returned to the house. Because of that, the judge who denied immunity concluded she had not been in "genuine fear'' for her life.

And contrary to Alexander's claim of firing a shot into the ceiling, a bullet hole was found in the living room wall at about the height of an adult's head, according to the Duval County prosecutor's office.

The case has become a cause celebre, with the NAACP and a black member of Congress jumping to Alexander's support.

"I have spoken to countless lawyers and they have yet to discover any cases in Florida where an African-American was able to successfully use the 'stand your ground' law defense in a hearing,'' Rep. Corinne Brown, a Jacksonville Democrat, claimed at Alexander's sentencing May 11.

Brown called for a study "into racial disparities in the application of this law.''

But the Times found that blacks and whites have had nearly the same success rate when arguing "stand your ground'' in hearings before a judge.

In four domestic dispute cases similar to Alexander's, judges granted immunity to a black woman and a white woman. Two other white women lost their bids for immunity and got lengthy prison sentences.

State Attorney Angela Corey noted that both judge and jury had rejected Alexander's "stand your ground'' defense.

"None of the physical evidence corroborates her story,'' Corey told reporters. "There was the 911 call … and you can clearly hear the distress in Rico Gray's voice. They had a verbal argument (in which) he said 'I'm outta here,' and she said, 'I've got something for you.' "

Once little known outside of Jacksonville, Corey is now familiar to millions. She is the prosecutor who charged Zimmerman.

A need for tracking

With cases like those of Martin and Alexander grabbing the spotlight, experts say it is essential to systematically track Florida's "stand your ground'' law.

"Given this extension in effect of the power to kill, that's an issue that should be monitored very carefully to see who is using it and who is abusing it,'' said Alfred Blumstein, a criminologist at Carnegie Mellon University.

No one knows for sure how often "stand your ground'' is used as a defense or what racial and ethnic groups are most affected by it. That's because no one keeps track of race or ethnicity in those cases.

For example, about 7 percent of the cases identified by the Times had a Hispanic victim or defendant. But the true percentage is probably far higher because police and arrest records generally classify people as "white'' or "black,'' not Hispanic.

Florida and many other states already keep track of so-called "justifiable'' homicides, including the race of defendant and victim. There is no "stand your ground" designation, however. The federal government compiles more detailed race statistics on crime, largely to ensure that the rights of minorities are protected under civil rights and hate crime laws.

"It's to monitor whether there are abuses in particular areas and by particular agencies,'' said George Kirkham, a professor emeritus at Florida State University who also has worked as a police officer.

Nweze, of the NAACP, agreed it would be a good idea to track "stand your ground'' cases but not without also tracking every other type of criminal case.

" 'Stand your ground' is just one law,'' she said, adding that "there's a whole litany of stuff that goes on'' that can have a disproportionate impact on black defendants and black victims.

Jeffrey Rosky, a University of Central Florida criminologist, agreed that there are racial disparities in the administration of justice.

"As for policymakers, this is where they need to have their judgment brought in as to what's too much,'' Rosky said. "Any kind of disparity is too much to a certain degree.''

 

[periopdoc]

My understanding is for affirmative defense in Florida, the defense produces evidence that it was an act of self defense, w/acquittal requiring only a preponderance of evidence.

Nope. In Florida, a claim of self defense must be disproved beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution. The defense has no requirement to prove anything. Omara even mentioned this in his closing today.

In Ohio the burden of proof is on the defense and is the preponderance of the evidence

- pod

 

[loveoforganic2]

Nope. In Florida, a claim of self defense must be disproved beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution. The defense has no requirement to prove anything. Omara even mentioned this in his closing today.

In Ohio the burden of proof is on the defense and is the preponderance of the evidence

- pod

Interesting, thanks. I would have acquitted even based on preponderance of evidence

 

[BLADEMDA]

Nope. In Florida, a claim of self defense must be disproved beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution. The defense has no requirement to prove anything. Omara even mentioned this in his closing today.

In Ohio the burden of proof is on the defense and is the preponderance of the evidence

- pod

Clearly the jury must acquit GZ on all counts.

 

[FiremedicMike]

So if someone suspicious follows you you're supposed to let them?

I can't wrap my head around the fact that you're so quick to affirm Martin's escalation of the situation while being so quick to condemn Zimmerman for his escalation of the situation.

You've made it pretty clear that

1. You haven't been following the case and don't know many of the facts.
2. You feel race is the larger issue at hand.
3. You continue to bring in a metaphorical strawman argument that had race been reversed, Zimmerman would be convicted regardless of evidence.
4. Because of 3, they should convict Zimmerman without question (despite your admission of #1).

Fess up dude, either you're being intentionally obtuse in order to troll this thread or you have some deep seeded racial anger issues.

 

[periopdoc]

Interesting, thanks. I would have acquitted even based on preponderance of evidence

Agreed. Based on preponderance of EVIDENCE I would acquit too, but I could understand why some would not. Based on a threshold of beyond reasonable doubt (prosecution proves he did not act in self defense), I really don't see how anyone could render a guilty verdict on either charge.


-pod

 

[periopdoc]

An armed person killed a unarmed person. If the race roles were reversed you know Zimmerman would have been in jail already

The only thing we can say for certain about a race role reversal hypothesis is that if the race roles were reversed you and I would have no idea who George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin were.

The stats on self defense prosecutions in the State of Florida do not suggest that our lack of knowledge would be due to an increased likelihood that the black guy was imprisoned.

- pod