Zimmerman Found Not Guilty

[JayBird]

NotNow, is there a established state definition of the term aggressor?  I know sometimes government definitions differ from what the normal publicly accepted definition is.

I am not aware of a definition in the statutes.

True there isn't and I even believe it is up to the police officer or state attorney's interpretation of the events to define and determine "aggressor" case by case

[I-10east]

Yall heard about this "Boycott Florida" stuff because of the stand your ground law. Although Florida isn't exactly the only state with stand your ground with twenty-thirty some odd states using this law. I guess that the backlash is from all of these high profile cases; Even though the most high profile one, the law wasn't used.

[JayBird]

^I am still undetermined as to whether its a real thing or media hyperbole. Surprisingly enough, there is a true stand your ground defense going to through Duval right now that has recieved very little media attention. It was the teenager shot at the gas station, the name is escaping me right now.

[I-10east]

^^^Jordan Davis. All of the posts I saw on TU (which kinda have a rep for conservative posters) think that the Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis cases are 'apples and oranges' with the Davis case being clearly the 'slam dunk' one as Michael Dunn was dead wrong, and the other case arguments can be made either way. I have to agree with that sentiment.

[NotNow]

Michael Dunn shot Jordan Davis at the Gate.  Did Dunn's attorney make a motion for a SYG dismissal?

[JeffreyS]

Which law is the "outrage" about?  The one that doesn't apply to this case? 

If you are saying the stand your ground law didn't apply that is not quite true.  Where as GZ did not use the stand your ground defense the passage of that law radically changed jury instructions in self defense cases.


Pre stand your ground instructions:

"The defendant cannot justify the use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless he used every reasonable means within his power and consistent with his own safety to avoid the danger before resorting to that force.

The fact that the defendant was wrongfully attacked cannot justify his use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if by retreating he could have avoided the need to use that force."

Stand your ground current instructions:

If the defendant was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in anyplace where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

I don't know what difference that would have made but yes stand your ground is part of this case.

[JayBird]

Michael Dunn shot Jordan Davis at the Gate.  Did Dunn's attorney make a motion for a SYG dismissal?

I do not believe the motion has been filed yet, but it has been claimed as his defense. Of course, being that he has switched lawyers maybe that'll change.

[JayBird]

^Now there is an angle I had not considered.  Do we have criminal lawyers on MJ?  Valid?  It does back up Ennis' initial statement that the law is what needs to be changed.

[NotNow]

As usual, you are veering waaayy off of the subject.  Do you now want to patter back and forth about government spending?  Just google us federal spending for the most recent year.  You will find SS and medicare/medicade are the largest chunks.  Are we done now? 

This thread is about the Zimmerman case.  Lake and I were discussing the effect of poverty on resulting criminal activity.  I hate to chide a moderator but please stick to the subject of the thread.

Returning to my original point, prisons are NOT industries (Perhaps I should have said "not meant to be industries".)  We should rethink how punishment for criminal acts is conducted in this country.  I reiterate that poverty is NOT a requirement for any percentage of the population or group of the population. 

[JeffreyS]

^Now there is an angle I had not considered.  Do we have criminal lawyers on MJ?  Valid?  It does back up Ennis' initial statement that the law is what needs to be changed.

Here is the link where I found the info I had hear it on the radio first.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/07/16/media-neglect-that-stand-your-ground-is-centerp/194916

[NotNow]

For a realistic look at the jury instructions, read them in their entirety here:

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Zimmerman_Final_Jury_Instructions.pdf

[NotNow]

I am not privvy to the facts of that case either.  But it appears to be much more clear cut.

[JeffreyS]

NN  the PDF contains the exact verbiage I typed save for it replaces "George Zimmerman" for "the defendant".(pg 12 paragraph 5) Thanks for posting the instructions it is an interesting read. Particularly the part about Manslaughter being a higher standard than just negligence.

[Ocklawaha]

Ock, i don't think those who are disappointed need lectures about what they think and what the laws are. My issue revolves around precedence, the message sent and potential of future conflicts generating similar confrontations like this. Because I've been in situations like this growing up, my personal perspective may be a little different. Nevertheless, I hope this case at least leads to a movement that results in the modification of certain laws and legal interpretations. No one should die from a confrontation generated from being followed in the dark by an armed stranger.

Sorry you got your feathers ruffled, simply expressing an opinion that those that want to try this over, and over, and over, and over again, need to move on. Jessie Jackson made a great point tonight when he spoke of change with dignity, speaking directly to the isolated incidents of violence and rioting. There are indeed messages in the precedence.  Attacking someone could prove to be fatal - DON'T DO IT! The guy that kills you might walk away from court as a free man - Which isn't going to help you if your the dead guy.

You completely missed the point of the OJ reference, precedence? Should White women fear for their lives because a Black man many considered guilty was on the loose in LA? NO. Because 'considered guilty' is without standing, OJ was innocent. Likewise Black citizens have nothing to fear from 'White Hispanics' (if they could find one).

This trial was turned into a circus within a couple of days when the media advertised Zimmerman into a new race - 'A White-Hispanic Man.' At that point this whole sorry case devolved into a rebroadcast of every 'White on Black crime' stereotypical story, ever told.

Had both men been Black, Hispanic or White chances are we would have never heard a thing about it only 100 miles up the road. Turn it into a race crime, rather then a cluster F**k with a bad ending and you have people calling for Zimmerman's execution.

OPINION. Do I like the Stand Your Ground Law? I can see where it might be useful in a burglary, robbery, rape or attempted murder where the victim has a weapon. I can also see where it will have a lot of grey area that needs to be tended to.

[thelakelander]

Ock....I was just being real by offering a common viewpoint typically overlooked by the mainstream.  In pages 1-45 of this thread, many of us have already provided our views on the issues you just raised.  I'd respond in more detail, but I don't have the energy at the moment.