No 'Stand Your Ground' for Zimmerman

Reba said:
Not to nit pick (well, yeah, I'm nit picking) the jury, other than a grand jury, doesn't decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute; they are to decide on if there is enough evidence to convict.
Click to expand...

Yea, thats what i should have said. I was pretty tired last night :lol:
 
Foxrac said:
I asked my professor in legal studies about SYG law in Zimmerman's case and he can't give an answer because it is extremely difficult to predict, however he said if Zimmerman was in New York so he will be guilty due to lack of SYG law.

He's pretty liberal professor from NY but he has some difficulties to follow up with my questions.
Click to expand...

NY is not friendly to self defese claimes in general.
 
Jiro said:
in a dead-person case.... it's always a murky fishy case because there's nobody alive to dispute a defendant's claim unless there is a witness or video camera.


yes... if that was easy... just about all cases have circumstantial evidence. what to do? you go with however and whatever you see it fit.


right. that's what I said. Zimmerman claimed self-defense. Prosecutor's disputing it.
Click to expand...
Reba is right all the way. The DA must prove that GZ murdered TM. If they fail to prove it, GZ will be acquitted definitely.
 
jonnyghost said:
And that is the big question.
Click to expand...

Zimmerman called the cops when he saw Martin , who had some food in this waistband . Zimmerman was in a car and Martin was walking, it's hard to follow a car when you're walking. Zimmerman followed Martin .
 
whatdidyousay! said:
Zimmerman called the cops when he saw Martin , who had some food in this waistband . Zimmerman was in a car and Martin was walking, it's hard to follow a car when you're walking. Zimmerman followed Martin .
Click to expand...
Are you a witness?
 
CrazyPaul said:
Reba is right all the way. The DA must prove that GZ murdered TM. If they fail to prove it, GZ will be acquitted definitely.
Click to expand...

um... we already know who killed Trayvon. Zimmerman.

what the prosecutors will show that Zimmerman made a fatal reckless decision with no common sense that led to Trayvon's death and it was completely preventable.
 
Jiro said:
um... we already know who killed Trayvon. Zimmerman.

what the prosecutors will show that Zimmerman made a fatal reckless decision with no common sense that led to Trayvon's death and it was completely preventable.
Click to expand...
We know that Zimmerman killed Trayvon. That's not disputed by anyone. The trial is to determine if that killing was a murder. It's up to the prosecutor to prove that the killing was a murder. That's what CP said.

Not all killings are murder, as determined by the courts.

We don't have that outcome yet.

Really, you should say, "what the prosecutors will attempt to show . . . "

Whether or not they succeed depends on the jury's verdict.
 
Reba said:
We know that Zimmerman killed Trayvon. That's not disputed by anyone. The trial is to determine if that killing was a murder. It's up to the prosecutor to prove that the killing was a murder. That's what CP said.

Not all killings are murder, as determined by the courts.

We don't have that outcome yet.

Really, you should say, "what the prosecutors will attempt to show . . . "

Whether or not they succeed depends on the jury's verdict.
Click to expand...

attempt to show? but they WILL show unless the judge has specific instruction that prevents them from introducing or mentioning a specific thing and then it will be up to jury to decide whether or not if they agree with prosecutors.
 
This trial has been dragging on long enough just like the Jodi Arias case.
I don't think Zimmerman will get off scott-free unless something is seriously lax with the Floridian courts. Involuntary manslaughter is the most sensible under mitigating factors if he doesn't get proved for murder.
 
Jiro said:
attempt to show? but they WILL show unless the judge has specific instruction that prevents them from introducing or mentioning a specific thing and then it will be up to jury to decide whether or not if they agree with prosecutors.
Click to expand...
It is still only an attempt by prosecutors if the jury doesn't agree to convict. If the jury does convict then that mean the prosecutors succeeded in proving their case. Otherwise, it's only an attempt.

It's always up to the jury to decide whether or not the prosecution succeeded or failed in its attempt.
 
Reba said:
It is still only an attempt by prosecutors if the jury doesn't agree to convict. If the jury does convict then that mean the prosecutors succeeded in proving their case. Otherwise, it's only an attempt.

It's always up to the jury to decide whether or not the prosecution succeeded or failed in its attempt.
Click to expand...

oh... :dizzy:
 
Reba said:
It seems that way but the Zimmerman trial hasn't even begun yet.
Click to expand...

Whoops, I thought it began already recently? My mistake :o

Reba said:
Juries are quirky.

They didn't convict OJ Simpson, Casey Anthony or Robert Blake.
Click to expand...

Some of those cases had good reasons why they weren't able to convict though.
OJ - Lots of mishandled evidence due to chain of custody problems/Mark Fuhrman issues, and was denied admission into the court.

Casey - I'm still wondering about that one, but it did seem hard to tie her to the crime without a reasonable doubt.

For Zimmerman, I think he doesn't have either of those benefits (as of yet) unless there something new the defense will present.
 
jonnyghost said:
NY is not friendly to self defese claimes in general.
Click to expand...

In NY, you need to have no chance to retreat in order to be justifiable homicide with deadly weapon.

I don't support SYG law, though.
 
Reba said:
Just seems that way. :lol:

Trial starts June 10.
Click to expand...
Not to nit pick (which is exactly what I am doing) but the trial is scheduled to start June 10th. Who know when it actually will start? Not like these kinds of cases are following the script.
:wave:
 
Foxrac said:
In NY, you need to have no chance to retreat in order to be justifiable homicide with deadly weapon.

I don't support SYG law, though.
Click to expand...

No? Personally I would rather escape if I can but I don't believe anyone should have to give up ground to an assailant to fulfill a legal obligation.
 
saywhatkid said:
Not to nit pick (which is exactly what I am doing) but the trial is scheduled to start June 10th. Who know when it actually will start? Not like these kinds of cases are following the script.
:wave:
Click to expand...
Touche'!

I should have caught that. From my years as a journalist, future events are always "scheduled." :giggle:
 
Foxrac said:
In NY, you need to have no chance to retreat in order to be justifiable homicide with deadly weapon.

I don't support SYG law, though.
Click to expand...

I fully support SYG law. nobody has to retreat.

I fully support a full weight of justice on vigilantism especially a cop-wannabe. nobody has a license to kill.
 
Back
Top